North Salt Lake Wellbeing Survey Findings 2023

By Dr. Courtney Flint and Team

utah wellbeing survey logo

Contact Information
Dr. Courtney Flint
courtney.flint@usu.edu
435-797-8635

Summary

North Salt Lake City is one of two cities participating in the Utah Wellbeing Survey Project in 2023. This project is designed to assess the wellbeing and local perspectives of city residents and to provide information to city leaders to inform their general planning process.

We are grateful to all participants who took the survey and to our city partners who helped to make this possible. Additionally, we are grateful to the Utah League of Cities and Towns and USU Extension for their financial support.

What is in this report?

This report describes findings from the 2023 North Salt Lake survey and some comparative information with other project cities. Feedback from city leaders, planners, and residents is welcome.

How was the survey conducted?

Starting in January of 2023, North Salt Lake City advertised the survey via social media, the city website, and email lists. All city residents age 18+ were encouraged to take the online Qualtrics survey.

How many people responded?

  • 605 viable surveys were recorded in this 2023 survey effort with 88% complete responses.
  • The adult population of North Salt Lake was estimated at 14,860, based on the 2017-2021 American Community Survey by the U.S. Census. The 605 survey responses in 2023 represent 4.07% of the adult population and have a conservative margin of error of 3.9%.

Key Findings

Highest Rated Wellbeing Categories:

  • Safety and Security
  • Mental Health
  • Living Standards 
  • Education

Most Important Wellbeing Categories:

  • Safety and Security
  • Mental Health
  • Physical Health
  • Living Standards 

Red Zone Wellbeing Categories: 
(High Importance, Low Rating)

  • Local Environmental Quality

Wellbeing varied within North Salt Lake by demographic characteristics and areas of town (with the East side reporting higher wellbeing levels. 

Perceptions that residents take action and feelings of community connection were lower in North Salt Lake than most other study communities.

Many indicated Population Growth Rate was too fast, while feelings on the Pace of Economic Development were more divided.  

Top concerns for the future of North Salt Lake were:

  • Air Quality (92% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Water Supply (83% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Affordable Housing (75% Moderate or Major Concern)

What do people value most about North Salt Lake?

People value the location and proximity to Salt Lake City and various amenities. They also value the social climate.

Key Wellbeing Issues and Resource Areas

In addition to providing partner cities with the opportunity to take part in surveys, the Utah Wellbeing Project has worked to provide curated resources for community leaders and citizens that aim to improve specific aspects of wellbeing. These Wellbeing Resources can be found on the Utah Wellbeing Project Website, along with other useful tools and information.

Based on results of the 2022 Utah Wellbeing Project Surveys in North Salt Lake City, key wellbeing issues include: Air Quality, Water Supply, Affordable Housing, and Local Environmental Quality. Below you will find links to specific wellbeing resource areas we believe may be used to target some of these issues.

Survey Respondent Characteristics

Table 1

Full Time Residents of North Salt Lake 99.2%
Part Time Residents of North Salt Lake 0.8%
Length of Residency — Range 96 years
Length of Residency — Average  14 years
Length of Residency — Median  10 years
Length of Residence 5 years or less 23.1%

Demographic characteristics of the survey respondents were compared below with U.S. Census information from the 2016-2020 American Community Survey. As the table shows, 2023 survey respondents were not fully representative of North Salt Lake. People aged 18-29, those who are male, those without a college degree, those who are Hispanic or Latino, those who are non-white, those who rent, and those with incomes between $25,000 and $74,999 were particularly underrepresented. People age 40-49, who are female, are married, own their home, are employed, have household incomes $150,000 and above, and those who have children under 18 in the household were particularly overrepresented. Not all respondents provided demographic information. Weighting was not used in any of the analysis for the findings presented below.

Table 2
Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents and U.S. Census Data for North Salt Lake


Demographic Characteristics		 North Salt Lake Wellbeing Survey
American Community Survey
2017-2021 Estimates
Online 2023 
605 Respondents 
Age 18-29 6.4% 26.9%
Age 30-39 23.6% 26.6%
Age 40-49 33.0% 15.7%
Age 50-59 13.9% 12.1%
Age 60-69 13.1% 10.6%
Age 70 or over 10.1% 8.1%
Adult Female 69.8% 50.8%
Adult Male 30.0% 49.2%
Adult non-conforming
or non-binary		 0.2% NA
No college degree 31.2% 57.1%
College degree (4-year) 68.8% 42.9%
Median household income NA $84,661
Income under $25,000 3.8% 7.2%
Income $25,000 to $49,999 2.9% 20.9%
Income $50,000 to $74,999 6.2% 16.8%
Income $75,000 to $99,999 16.4% 12.5%
Income $100,000 to $149,999 24.0% 23.6%
Income $150,000 or over 46.6% 19.1%
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 60.1% NA
Other religion 13.2% NA
Agnostic/Atheist/No religious preference 26.7% NA
Hispanic/Latino 4.4% 15.2%
White 95.6% 84.3%
Nonwhite 4.4% 15.7%
Married 82.6% 58.5%
Children under 18 in household 56.7% 43.5%
Employed 65.4% 74.5%
Out of work and looking for work 0.4% 2.4%
Other 30.2% 25.6%
Own home/Owner occupied 90.8% 68.5%
Rent home/Renter occupied/Other 9.2% 31.5%

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in North Salt Lake

Survey participants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in North Salt Lake. These wellbeing indicators were both measured on a 5-point scale from very poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score in North Salt Lake was 4.08 with 81% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in North Salt Lake was 3.63 with 58% of respondents indicating community wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale.

Overall personal wellbeing and community wellbeing were both higher for East side respondents (average 4.24 and 3.75 respectively) than those from the West side (3.95 and 3.52 respectively)or Midtown (3.85 and 3.52 respectively). 

Type: Bar Title: Personal Wellbeing in North Salt Lake Subtitle: How would you rate your overall personal wellbeing? Data: 0% rated a 1 (Very Poor), 3% rated a 2, 15% rated a 3, 51% rated a 4, 30% rated a 5 (Excellent)

Type: Bar Title: Community Wellbeing in North Salt Lake Subtitle: How would you rate oberall wellbeing in North Salt Lake? Data: 2% rated a 1 (Very Poor), 7% rated a 2, 34% rated a 3, 42% rated a 4, 16% rated a 5 (Excellent)

Comparing Wellbeing Across Utah Cities

The graphs below compare 2023 personal and community wellbeing results in North Salt Lake with the results from cities that participated in wellbeing surveys in 2022. The Utah League of Cities and Towns classifies North Salt Lake as an Established/Mid-Sized city. Some cities may fit within more than one cluster. Within the Established/Mid-Sized city cluster, North Salt Lake fell just above the cluster average in terms of the average overall personal wellbeing score and just below the cluster average in terms of the average community wellbeing score. 

Dot Plot. Title: Overall Personal Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2022). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Very Poor to 5=Excellent). Group: Established/Mid-Sized Cities. Draper: Average Score 4.27; Millcreek: Average Score 4.24; Cottonwood Heights: Average Score 4.19; Layton: Average Score 4.16; North Salt Lake: Average Score 4.08; Bountiful: Average Score 4.09; Sandy: Average Score 4.07; South Jordan: Average Score 4.06; West Jordan: Average Score 4.03; Midvale: Average Score 3.94; Logan: Average Score 3.89; Tooele: Average Score 3.76. Group: Rapid Growth Cities. Vineyard: Average Score 4.31; Highland: Average Score 4.28; Hyde Park: Average Score 4.25; Nibley: Average Score 4.20; Spanish Fork: Average Score 4.15; North Logan: Average Score 4.15; Lehi: Average Score 4.10; Saratoga Springs: Average Score 4.02; Santaquin: Average Score 3.98; Herriman: Average Score 3.87. Group: Rural, Rural Hub, & Resort and Traditional Communities. Beaver: Average Score 4.18; Helper: Average Score 4.15; Nephi: Average Score 4.11; Tremonton: Average Score 4.10; Park City: Average Score 4.04; Bluff: Average Score 3.96; Ephraim: Average Score 3.89; Delta: Average Score 3.88; Blanding: Average Score: 3.85; Price: Average Score 3.83; East Carbon: Average Score: 3.73; Moab: Average Score: 3.50.

Dot Plot. Title: Overall Community Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2022). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Very Poor to 5=Excellent). Group: Established/Mid-Sized Cities. Draper: Average Score 4.03; South Jordan: Average Score 4.02; Bountiful: Average Score 3.84; Sandy: Average Score 3.79; Millcreek: Average Score 3.79; Cottonwood Heights: Average Score 3.72; Layton: Average Score 3.71; North Salt Lake: Average Score 3.63; West Jordan: Average Score 3.55; Logan: Average Score 3.46; Midvale: Average Score 3.24; Tooele: Average Score 3.15. Group: Rapid Growth Cities. Highland: Average Score 4.15; Hyde Park: Average Score 4.05; North Logan: Average Score 3.99; Spanish Fork: Average Score 3.98; Nibley: Average Score 3.87; Vineyard: Average Score 3.84; Santaquin: Average Score 3.72; Lehi: Average Score 3.61; Herriman: Average Score 3.49; Saratoga Springs: Average Score 3.47. Group: Rural, Rural Hub, & Resort and Traditional Communities. Helper: Average Score 4.09; Bluff: Average Score 3.84; Beaver: Average Score 3.82; Ephraim: Average Score 3.75; Nephi: Average Score 3.62; Park City: Average Score 3.50; Delta: Average Score 3.44; Blanding: Average Score 3.44; Tremonton: Average Score: 3.32; Price: Average Score 3.15; East Carbon: Average Score: 2.98; Moab: Average Score: 2.84.

Wellbeing Domains in North Salt Lake

According to national and international entities that track wellbeing, there are a number of common dimensions or domains of wellbeing. In this survey, respondents rated ten domains on a 5-point scale from poor to excellent, suggesting how their wellbeing was doing in each area. They were also asked to indicate the importance of each domain to their overall personal wellbeing on a 5-point scale from not at all important to very important. The top two highest rated wellbeing domains for respondents in North Salt Lake were Living Standards (79%), and Safety and Security (77%). The four most important wellbeing domains were Safety and Security (98%), Mental Health (98%), Physical Health (94%), and Living Standards (92%).

Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: How would you rate your level of personal wellbeing in each of the following categories? Category: Safety and Security - 23% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 77% rated as good or excellent; Category: Connection with Nature - 43% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 57% rated as good or excellent; Category: Local Environmental Quality- 70% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 30% rated as good or excellent; Category: Education - 30% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 70% rated as good or excellent; Category: Living Standards - 21% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 79% rated as good or excellent; Category: Mental Health - 28% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 72% rated as good or excellent; Category: Leisure Time - 37% of respondents rated as poor, fair or moderate while 63% rated as good or excellent; Category: Physical Health - 33% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 67% rated as good or excellent; Category: Social Connections - 40% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 60% rated as good or excellent; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 65% of respondents rated as poor, fair or moderate while 35% rated as good or excellent.

Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Importance in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: How important are the following categories to your overall personal wellbeing? Category: Safety and Security - 2% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 98% rated as important or very important; Category: Mental Health - 2% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 98% rated as important or very important; Category: Physical Health - 6% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 94% rated as important or very important; Category: Living Standards - 8% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 92% rated as important or very important; Category: Connection with Nature - 22% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 78% of respondents rated as important or very important; Category: Leisure Time - 18% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 82% rated as important or very important; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 10% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 90% rated as important or very important; Category: Social Connections - 28% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 72% rated as important or very important; Category: Education - 14% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 86% rated as important or very important; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 45% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 55% rated as important or very important.

Wellbeing Matrix for North Salt Lake

The graph below illustrates the relationship between the average rating and the average importance of wellbeing domains for survey respondents from North Salt Lake. Safety and Security, Living Standards, Mental Health, Physical Health, and Education were highly important and rated above average among the domains. Local Environmental Quality fell in the “red zone” of higher importance but lower ratings. 

Scatterplot. Title: North Salt Lake Wellbeing Matrix. Domains are classified into four quadrants depending on their average rating and average importance as compared to the average of all the average domain ratings and the average of all the average domain importance ratings. High rating, high importance (green quadrant) domains include: Safety and Security, Living Standards, Physical Health, Education, and Mental Health. High rating, lower Importance (blue quadrant) domains include: Leisure Time. Lower rating, lower importance (yellow quadrant) domains include: Social Connections, Connection with Nature, and Cultural Opportunities. Lower rating, high importance (red quadrant) domains include: Local Environmental Quality.

How are Demographic Characteristics Related to Wellbeing?

The demographic variables age, gender, college degree, religion, income, and length of residence were found to have varying relationships with wellbeing perspectives among North Salt Lake respondents as shown in the table below based on a generalized linear model with unweighted data. The +/- sign indicates whether the wellbeing score in the specific demographic group was significantly higher or lower than the reference group in each demographic variable (p<.05). 

Table 3
Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and Wellbeing Domains in North Salt Lake

  Domains Rated Demographic Variables
Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Highest Income ($150,000+) Resident 5 Years or Less
Wellbeing Ratings
Overall Personal Wellbeing +
vs 40-59

    +   +
vs Under $50,000		 -
Wellbeing in North Salt Lake            
Connection with Nature + 
     - 
vs A/A/NRP 		 -
vs $100,000-
$149,999		  
Cultural Opportunities + 
vs 18-39		     - 
vs A/A/NRP  		   -
Education     +   +
vs Under $50,000

  
Leisure Time + 

    +   +
vs $75,000-
$99,999		 -
Living Standards + 
vs 18-39		   +   +
vs $50,000-
$99,999		  -
Local Environmental Quality + 

   + - 
vs A/A/NRP 		    
Mental Health +          -
Physical Health       + - 
vs A/A/NRP  		 +
vs Under $50,000-
$74,999		  -
Safety & Security     +   +
vs $75,000-
$99,999		  
Social Connections         -
vs $100,000-
$149,999		  -
  Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Highest Income ($150,000+) Resident 5 Years or Less
Domains Domain Importance 
Connection with Nature            
Cultural Opportunities         -
vs Under $50,000
  
Education - 

       -
vs $100,000-
$149,999		  
Leisure Time     +      
Living Standards            
Local Environmental Quality         -
vs $100,000-
$149,999		  
Mental Health   + 
   -
vs Other		    
Physical Health +
vs 40-59		     - 
vs A/A/NRP 		 +
vs $75,000-
$99,999		  
Safety and Security            
Social Connections         -
vs Under $50,000		   
A/A/NRP = Agnostic/Atheist/No Religious Preference

Community Action and Connection in North Salt Lake

Survey participants were asked about community actions and community connection in North Salt Lake. Both questions were scored on a 5-point scale from not at all (1) to a great deal (5). When asked about the degree to which people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities in North Salt Lake, the average score was 3.05. When asked about the degree they feel connected to their community, the average score was 2.92.

Respondents from the East side were more likely to indicate that residents take action (40% indicated 4 or 5 on 5-point scale versus 30% and 22% for West and Midtown respondents respectively) and reported higher levels of community connectedness (39% indicated 4 or 5 on 5-point scale versus 24% and 27% for West and Midtown).

Bar chart. Title: Community Action in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: In North Salt Lake, to what degree do people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities? Data - 1 Not at All: 6% of respondents; 2: 23% of respondents; 3: 37% of respondents; 4: 25% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 8% of respondents

Bar chart. Title: Community Connection in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to North Salt Lake as a community? Data - 1 Not at All: 11% of respondents; 2: 24% of respondents; 3: 35% of respondents; 4: 22% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 8% of respondents

Table 4
Demographic Characteristics and Community Questions

Community Questions Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Highest Income ($150,000+) Resident 5 Years or Less
Do people in North Salt Lake take action? + 

          -
Do you feel connected to your community?       +
vs Other		   -

A significant, positive relationship was found between individuals’ community connection and overall personal wellbeing.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Overall Wellbeing and Community Connection in North Salt Lake. Of the 17 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 1 or 2, 94% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 6% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 85 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 3, 86% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 14% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 287 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 4, 73% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 168 participants that rate their overall wellbeing as a 5, 53% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5.

Comparing Community Action and Connection Across Cities

The graphs below show how North Salt Lake compares with Wellbeing Project cities from 2022 on the degree to which people take action in response to local problems and opportunities and how connected people feel to their city as a community. North Salt Lake was in the lower half on perceived community action and community connection based on the number of people indicating a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale. 

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Community Action Across Cities. Subtitle: In your city to what degree do people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities? 1 being not at all. 5 being a great deal. Data – City: Helper- 23% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 77% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Delta 29% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 71% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bluff 33% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 67% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Beaver 42% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 58% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Blanding 48% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 52% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hyde Park 48% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 52% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Highland 50% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 50% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Spanish Fork 51% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 49% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bountiful 53% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Logan 55% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 45% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nibley 55% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 45% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nephi 57% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 43% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: South Jordan 57% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 43% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vineyard 59% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Millcreek 60% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 40% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Draper 61% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 39% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Ephraim 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Santaquin 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Moab 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tremonton 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Layton 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Price 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Salt Lake 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Sandy 69% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 31% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tooele 71% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 29% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Logan 71% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 29% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Lehi 72% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 28% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Herriman 72% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 28% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Cottonwood Heights 73% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Saratoga Springs 74% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 26% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; East Carbon 75% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 25% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; West Jordan 81% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 19% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; Midvale 89% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 11% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Community Connection Across Cities. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to your city as a community? 1 being not at all. 5 being a great deal. Data – City: Helper 29% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 71% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bluff 40% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 60% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Beaver 42% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 58% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Spanish Fork 50% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 50% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Delta- 51% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 49% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Highland- 56% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 44% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Logan- 56% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 44% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hyde Park- 56% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 44% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nephi- 57% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 43% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Millcreek- 58% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 42% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Park City- 58% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 42% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Ephraim- 59% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: South Jordan- 59% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Draper- 61% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 39% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bountiful- 61% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 39% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Blanding- 62% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 38% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vineyard- 62% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 38% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Logan- 64% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 36% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nibley- 64% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 36% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Santaquin- 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Moab- 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Layton- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: East Carbon- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Sandy- 68% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 32% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tremonton- 69% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 31% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Salt Lake- 69% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 31% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; Cottonwood Heights- 70% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 30% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Price- 70% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 30% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tooele- 71% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 29% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Lehi- 73% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Herriman- 78% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 22% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: West Jordan- 79% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 21% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Saratoga Springs- 81% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 19% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Midvale- 85% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 15% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5.

Participation in Recreation and Nature-Related Activities

Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they participated in eight different recreation or nature-based activities in the last 12 months. Enjoying wildlife or birds in your yard or neighborhood (82%) was the most common activity for respondents, followed by recreating in city parks (79%) and non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah (73%).

Type: Bar Graph Title: Participation in Recreation and Nature-based Activities in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: Have you participated in any of the following activities during the past 12 months? Data - 73% of respondents indicated yes to non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah. 82% of respondents indicated yes to enjoying wildlife or birds in your yard or neighborhood. 38% of respondents indicated yes to motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah. 79% of respondents indicated yes to recreating in parks in your city. 72% of respondents indicated yes to gardening. 35% of respondents indicated yes to city recreation programs. 56% of respondents indicated yes to watching or reading nature-related programs or publications. 51% of respondents indicated yes to walking with a pet in your city.

For North Salt Lake respondents, participation in city recreation programs, motorized and non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah, enjoying birds or wildlife in your yard or neighborhood, and gardening were positively and significantly related to overall personal wellbeing. Participation in city recreations programs and enjoying birds or wildlife in your yard or neighborhood were positively and significantly related to community wellbeing. 

Participation in recreating in city parks, motorized and non-motorized recreation on public lands or waters in Utah, gardening, enjoying birds or wildlife in your yard or neighborhood, and city recreation programs were positively and significantly related to community connection. 

Influence of Landscape on Wellbeing

Survey participants were asked about the influence of landscape features on their wellbeing. Natural landscapes including mountains and rivers and streams were found to have an overwhelmingly positive influence on wellbeing. There was a particularly strong negative perception of extractive industry among North Salt Lake respondents.

Likert Graph. Title: The Role of Landscape Features in North Salt Lake Residents' Wellbeing. Subtitle: How does the presence of the following landscape features influence your wellbeing? Feature: Mountains - 0% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 3% indicated neither, 97% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Rivers and Streams - 0% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 7% indicated neither, 93% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Lakes - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 15% indicated neither, 84% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Trails - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 9% indicated neither, 90% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Red Rock - 2% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 36% indicated neither, 62% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: City Parks - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 7% indicated neither, 92% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Farmland - 3% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 39% indicated neither, 58% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Residential Development - 30% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 44% indicated neither, 26% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Commercial Development - 33% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 42% indicated neither, 25% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Extractive Industry - 72% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 24% indicated neither, 3% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Manufacturing Industry - 61% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 35% indicated neither, 5% indicated positively or very positively.

Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development

In North Salt Lake, 57% of respondents indicated that they felt population growth was too fast, followed by 32% indicating it was just right. On the pace of economic development, 40% indicated it was just right, 28% too fast, and 19% too slow. 

Type: Bar graph. Title: Population Growth in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in South Weber? Data – 1% of respondents rated too slow; 32% of respondents rated just right; 57% of respondents rated too fast; 10% of respondents rated no opinion. 

Type: Bar graph. Title: Economic Development in North Salt Lake. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in South Weber? Data – 19% of respondents rated too slow; 40% of respondents rated just right; 28% of respondents rated too fast; 14% of respondents rated no opinion. 

The graphs below show how North Salt Lake compares to other participating cities in the Wellbeing Project from 2022 on these perceptions of population growth and economic development. 

Type: Likert Graph. Title: Population Growth. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in your city/town? Subtitle: Established/Mid-Sized Cities and cities of the first and second class. Data – City: Logan – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 69% of respondents rated too fast; City: Draper – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 69% of respondents rated too fast; City: Tooele – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 67% of respondents rated too fast; City: Layton – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 65% of respondents rated too fast; City: West Jordan – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 63% of respondents rated too fast; City: South Jordan – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 63% of respondents rated too fast; City: Midvale – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 62% of respondents rated too fast; City: Sandy - 2% of respondents rated too slow, 61% of respondents rated too fast; City: Cottonwood Heights - 2% of respondents rated too slow, 56% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bountiful - 2% of respondents rated too slow, 51% of respondents rated too fast; North Salt Lake - 1% of respondents rated too slow, 57% of respondents rated too fast; City: Millcreek - 1% of respondents rated too slow, 44% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rapid Growth Cities. Data – City: Lehi – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 76% of respondents rated too fast; City: Herriman – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 74% of respondents rated too fast; City: Santaquin – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 71% of respondents rated too fast; City: Spanish Fork – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 71% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nibley – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 71% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hyde Park – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 69% of respondents rated too fast; City: North Logan – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 69% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vineyard – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 66% of respondents rated too fast; City: Saratoga Springs – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 65% of respondents rated too fast; City: Highland – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 65% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rural Hub/Resort and Traditional Rural Communities. Data – City: Park City – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 82% of respondents rated too fast;City: Tremonton – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 67% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nephi – 4% of respondents rated too slow, 63% of respondents rated too fast; City: Moab – 4% of respondents rated too slow, 60% of respondents rated too fast; City: Ephraim – 4% of respondents rated too slow, 50% of respondents rated too fast; City: Beaver – 9% of respondents rated too slow, 40% of respondents rated too fast; City: Price – 21% of respondents rated too slow, 25% of respondents rated too fast; City: Helper – 9% of respondents rated too slow, 23% of respondents rated too fast; City: Blanding – 16% of respondents rated too slow, 15% of respondents rated too fast; City: East Carbon – 20% of respondents rated too slow, 15% of respondents rated too fast; City: Delta – 13% of respondents rated too slow, 14% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bluff – 19% of respondents rated too slow, 10% of respondents rated too fast.

Type: Likert Graph. Title: Economic Development. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic growth in your city/town? Subtitle: Established/Mid-Sized Cities and cities of the first and second class. Data – City: Draper – 3% of respondents rated too slow, 50% of respondents rated too fast; City: Logan – 12% of respondents rated too slow, 47% of respondents rated too fast; City: Layton – 9% of respondents rated too slow, 44% of respondents rated too fast; City: Sandy – 7% of respondents rated too slow, 41% of respondents rated too fast; City: Cottonwood Heights – 10% of respondents rated too slow, 38% of respondents rated too fast; City: South Jordan – 6% of respondents rated too slow, 38% of respondents rated too fast; City: Tooele – 34% of respondents rated too slow, 34% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bountiful – 13% of respondents rated too slow, 28% of respondents rated too fast; City: West Jordan – 19% of respondents rated too slow, 28% of respondents rated too fast; City: Millcreek – 8% of respondents rated too slow, 27% of respondents rated too fast; North Salt Lake – 19% of respondents rated too slow, 28% of respondents rated too fast; City: Midvale – 24% of respondents rated too slow, 22% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rapid Growth Cities. Data – City: Lehi – 7% of respondents rated too slow, 59% of respondents rated too fast; City: Spanish Fork – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 49% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nibley – 11% of respondents rated too slow, 42% of respondents rated too fast; City: Saratoga Springs – 8% of respondents rated too slow, 39% of respondents rated too fast; City: North Logan – 9% of respondents rated too slow, 39% of respondents rated too fast; City: Herriman – 21% of respondents rated too slow, 39% of respondents rated too fast; City: Santaquin – 23% of respondents rated too slow, 38% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hyde Park – 12% of respondents rated too slow, 37% of respondents rated too fast; City: Highland – 23% of respondents rated too slow, 30% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vineyard – 29% of respondents rated too slow, 23% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rural Hub/Resort and Traditional Rural Communities. Data – City: Park City – 3% of respondents rated too slow, 77% of respondents rated too fast; City: Moab – 19% of respondents rated too slow, 59% of respondents rated too fast; City: Tremonton – 13% of respondents rated too slow, 45% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nephi – 27% of respondents rated too slow, 31% of respondents rated too fast; City: Ephraim – 24% of respondents rated too slow, 30% of respondents rated too fast; City: Beaver – 30% of respondents rated too slow, 18% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bluff – 33% of respondents rated too slow, 14% of respondents rated too fast; City: Blanding – 43% of respondents rated too slow, 5% of respondents rated too fast; City: Delta – 43% of respondents rated too slow, 5% of respondents rated too fast; City: Helper – 16% of respondents rated too slow, 2% of respondents rated too fast; City: Price – 61% of respondents rated too slow, 2% of respondents rated too fast; City: East Carbon – 67% of respondents rated too slow, 0% of respondents rated too fast.

Concerns in North Salt Lake

Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a concern as they look to the future of North Salt Lake. Air Quality, Water Supply, and Affordable Housing were the top three concerns with over 74% of respondents indicating these were moderate or major concerns.

Title: Concerns in South Weber. Subtitle: As you look to the future of South Weber, how much of a concern are the following issues? Data – Category: Water Supply- 17% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 83% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Opportunities for Youth- 39% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 61% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Affordable Housing- 25% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 75% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Public Lands- 46% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 54% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Employment Opportunities- 54% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 46% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Quality Food- 47% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 53% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Shopping Opportunities- 46% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 54% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Recreation Opportunities- 41% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 59% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Substance Abuse- 60% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 40% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Roads and Transportation- 30% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 70% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Social and Emotional Support- 55% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 45% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Health Care- 56% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 44% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Public Safety- 34% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 66% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Mental Health Care - 50% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 50% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Air Quality- 8% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 92% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern. Climate Change- 29% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 71% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern.

Other concerns were raised by 96 respondents who filled in the “other” category. Responses identical to the categories above are not included in the table. 

Table 5

Other Concerns Mentioned
High density housing, apartments (17) Taxes (3) Library access
Overpopulation, overgrowth (9) Politics and government (3) Earthquakes
Mosquitoes (5) Public schools (3) Wildlife
City image, cleanliness (5) Blasting from mine (2) Cultural opportunities
The Great Salt Lake (5) Public transportation (2) Excavation
Health, cancer (4) Parking (2) People not containing their dogs
Deer (3) Green space (2) Refinery
Sewer smell (3) Trucks, traffic noise (2) Airbnb's
Lack of diversity, discrimination (3) Railroad crossings Too many car dealerships 

Open Comments

Survey respondents were asked to comment on what they value most about North Salt Lake and to provide any additional comments about wellbeing in North Salt Lake. Comments have been shared with city leaders. In summary, residents of North Salt Lake valued the location and access to many amenities. Social connections within the community were also highly valued by residents of North Salt Lake. In the additional comments section many residents brought up the rate of growth and development in the city . Comments about the refineries and health were also often brought up. 

On This Page