Salt Lakers should resolve to abandon false myths around traffic and housing in 2025. | News | Salt Lake City Weekly

Salt Lakers should resolve to abandon false myths around traffic and housing in 2025. 

Small Lake City

Pin It
Favorite
small_lake_city.png

The transition to a new calendar year is a time of reflection and opportunity. I imagine many of City Weekly's readers are setting goals to eat better, exercise more, stay in closer contact with their friends and loved ones and to contribute more of their time and talent to acts of service within their community. These are all great goals, and I wish everyone the best as they embark on a new year of personal growth.

But if I may offer another suggestion for new-year goals, I'd ask that we all try to elevate the depth and quality of public discourse, particularly around local Salt Lake City issues.

For example: Widening highways, or building new ones, does not alleviate traffic congestion. In reality, it makes congestion worse.

Imagine a hoarder. Now imagine their family trying to help "fix" the clutter problem by moving this person, along with all of their possessions, to a larger home. I can assure you, with new space suddenly available for stacks of old magazines and piles of tchotchkes, the level of hoarding will not go down. It will only increase.

Driving has a similar relationship with spatial constraints. Traffic is not due to too many cars on the road, but rather, too many people choosing to drive a private car.

Building more space to drive in will never and has never prompted a person to drive less frequently. The only thing that gets people to drive less—the only thing that demonstrably works to ease congestion—is to invest in alternatives to driving.

Take one glance at the comments section for any reporting around transit and you will immediately see that most people don't understand this. The archetypal Utahn is a suburban commuter sitting in gridlock as Frontrunner zips by, complaining about traffic while wondering when the Legislature will "do something about air quality."

Similarly, people misunderstand density, arguing over and over again that this or that proposed housing project will "ruin" a neighborhood. But a person needs a home to thrive and a community needs people to thrive. Housing doesn't ruin a neighborhood, it makes a neighborhood.

And before the NIMBY chorus of "yes, but we need affordable housing" starts, remember that any home is more affordable than one that doesn't exist. And remember that the money a person spends on transportation counts toward the "affordability" of their housing situation.

Businesses need customers and residents need jobs. Children need schools and schools need teachers. I could offer more examples but the point is the same: the benefit of city living is proximity and density maximizes that benefit while minimizing the costs related to maintenance and public services.

My political philosophy is quite simple: I believe in doing more of what works and less of what doesn't. Unfortunately, too many people get confused about which is which, often relying on tired, debunked talking points that—despite their lack of real-world legitimacy—persist year after year under a cloud of misplaced assumptions and bad-faith posturing by elected leaders and media personalities who should know better.

If nothing else, let 2025 be the year that you challenge your assumptions, and invite others to do the same.

Pin It
Favorite

Tags:

About The Author

Benjamin Wood

Benjamin Wood

Bio:
Lifelong Utahn Benjamin Wood has worn the mantle of City Weekly's news editor since 2021. He studied journalism at Utah State University and previously wrote for The Salt Lake Tribune, the Deseret News and Entertainment Weekly

Readers also liked…

© 2025 Salt Lake City Weekly

Website powered by Foundation