KUER0%

Raising roommate limits in SLC and Ogden might help squeeze more from housing64%

By Macy Lipkin0%

3/9/2026, 10:12:49 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Hasty Generalization, and Optimism Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 25.9% saturation with 179 hits. Analysis detected 659 faulty-reasoning hits from 692 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 58.4% and a BS Rank of 64% (7,985 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.50% of the article peer group.

Ogden and Salt Lake City are considering allowing more unrelated residents to live together. 
Both cities currently restrict unrelated residents to three per household, the minimum allowed by Utah law. 
Ogden’s proposal is part of a massive zoning overhaul. 
The draft regulations would allow up to 10 unrelated adults to live together in a detached single-family home, or eight in any other unit, plus their kids, for a maximum of 15 people in all. 
It defines a household as a group living together and sharing responsibilities like meals, chores and expenses. 
The goal is to modernize and clarify the code for residents and developers. 
“A household can include, you know, any people who live in that dwelling unit,” said Barton Brierley, Ogden’s planning manager. 
“It might be roommates, it might be a traditional family.” 
Salt Lake City’s proposal would do away with the limit on unrelated residents altogether and allow a household of any size where individuals share common amenities like the kitchen and living room. 
Utah is the ninth most expensive housing market in the country, and state households are getting smaller while living situations with unrelated people are becoming more common, according to the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute. 
Lifting limits could help housing become more affordable since more people can share the rent, said Howard Husock, senior fellow specializing in housing at the center-right American Enterprise Institute. 
While some residents may worry about neighborhood overcrowding, Husock thinks there may be a self-enforcing limit. 
“Most people want to have their own bedroom,” he said. 
The International Residential Code, which Utah follows, sets a minimum of 70 square feet for habitable rooms. 
Salt Lake City requires an extra 50 square feet per person when more than two people share a bedroom. 
Ogden’s proposal would limit a residence to three rental contracts to make sure someone is responsible for upkeep and chores. 
“You don't want a lot of people just pointing fingers at someone else,” Brierley said. 
Revamping code is also about making sure the city complies with federal fair housing laws, Brierley said. 
The city does not limit how many people can live together in a group home for people with disabilities, but it does limit unrelated residents in standard homes, which could violate laws against having separate rules for people with disabilities. 
Ogden isn’t distinguishing between homes based on size for simplicity’s sake, but the city’s code services department could address instances of overcrowding or misuse of property, he said. 
Salt Lake City’s current limit on unrelated residents is unenforceable, said Nick Norris, the city’s planning director. 
Rather than focus on the number of residents and their relation to each other, their new focus will be on rule compliance around things like noise and trash. 
This isn’t new, Norris said. 
“We're going back to how the city's first zoning code actually defined family and defined it for, I think, about 50 years.” 
Salt Lake City looked to Draper as a model. 
The city does not limit household size and did not see an increase in occupancy issues after removing the limit to 5 unrelated people, according to a city spokesperson. 
“If this can work in a suburban community in Utah, in Salt Lake County, why can't it work for us as well?” Norris said. 
Some landlords have said they would like to rent a four- or five-bedroom house to four or five unrelated tenants, while others plan to impose their own occupancy limits, Norris said. 
Residents might worry about increased parking or noise issues from large households, but Norris said those problems are just as likely in a home with many related residents. 
The Ogden City Planning Commission is scheduled to consider the new unified development code on March 11. 
The changes will then have to be approved by the city council. 
Salt Lake City is preparing to release its proposal for a 45-day public comment period, Norris said. 
After that, the draft will head to the planning commission for a public hearing, and the commission will make its recommendation to the city council. 
Macy Lipkin is a Report for America corps member who reports for KUER in northern Utah. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.4%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.0%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 4.3%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.0%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 25.9%Macy Lipkin: 5.8%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect25.9%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 3.9%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 6.4%Macy Lipkin: 5.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias6.4%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.1%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 5.6%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.6%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.8%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.2%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 24.7%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority24.7%This article: 3.5%Macy Lipkin: 1.5%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma3.5%This article: 5.8%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope5.8%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 9.1%Macy Lipkin: 3.6%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization9.1%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 2.2%Macy Lipkin: 4.6%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion2.2%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 2.2%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.4%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 4.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division4.0%This article: 5.6%Macy Lipkin: 3.9%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal5.6%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.7%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.9%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.5%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Macy Lipkin: 0.2%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%Macy Lipkin: 0.7%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

692 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.