By Dr. Courtney Flint | May 20, 2020

Lehi Wellbeing Survey Findings

May 2020

Dr. Courtney Flint
Utah State University Extension

extension logo
utah wellbeing survey logo

Summary

Lehi is one of 25 cities participating in the Utah Wellbeing Project. 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.

Eighteen cities participated in an online survey effort in February and March 2020. Lehi City advertised the survey via social media and locally distributed flyers. All city residents age 18 and over were encouraged to take the survey (administered through Qualtrics), available from January 28, 2020 to February 23, 2020.

A total of 295 completed surveys were recorded during this effort. This report contains descriptive information based on Lehi resident responses and comparisons with other cities from this most recent survey effort.

Public intercept surveys with iPads were also conducted in May 2019. A report based on those findings is available at https://usu.edu/utah-wellbeing-project.

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

Acknowledgements: Utah League of Cities and Towns, Casey Trout, Rachel Sagers, and Caitlyn Rogers

Respondent Characteristics

Nearly all of the Lehi survey respondents (99.3%) were full-time residents. The length of residency ranged from 0 to 76 years with an average of 13.6 years. More than two-thirds of respondents (70.5%) of the respondents lived in Lehi for more than 5 years.

 Table 1 details the demographic characteristics of the respondents and allows for comparison with U.S. Census information from the 2014-2018 American Community Survey. As the table shows, females and higher income residents are overrepresented in the resulting survey sample. The survey results underrepresent nonwhites or Latinos, but are more representative in terms of the presence of children in the household, and employment. There is no census comparison for religion. These characteristics should be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings from the survey, as survey respondents may not be fully representative of Lehi residents.

Table 1

Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents and U.S. Census Data for Lehi

Demographic Characteristics Lehi iPad Survey 2019 (126 Respondents) Lehi Online Survey 2020 (295 Respondents) American Community Survey
2016-2020 Estimates
Age 18-39 66.4% 44.0% 53.4%
Age 40-59 27.2% 42.7% 33.4%
Age 60 or Over 6.4% 13.3% 13.2%
Female 70.4% 65.5% 50.0%
Male 29.6% 34.5% 50.0%
No college degree 34.4% 40.9% 54.7%
College degree (4-year) 65.6% 58.1% 45.3%
Median household income NA NA $101,429
Income Under $50,000 18.7% 8.4% 15.9%
Income $50,000 to $74,999 17.1% 15.1% 16.0%
Income $75,000 to $99,999 17.9% 23.1% 17.4%
Income $100,000 to $149,999 33.3% 30.7% 28.7%
Income $150,000 or over 13.0% 22.7% 22.0%
Religion: Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints		 82.3% 74.3% NA
Other religion 8.1% 10.2% NA
No religious preference 9.7% 15.5% NA
White (non-Latino) 88.7% 92.3% 85.6%
Nonwhite or Latino 11.3% 7.7% 14.4%
Children under 18 in household NA 63.6% 57.8%
Employed (combined) NA 67.1% 69.9% (in labor force age 16+)
Out of work and looking for work NA 1.2% 2.9% (unemployed)
Other NA 31.7% 27.2% (not in labor force)

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in Lehi

ticipants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in Lehi. These wellbeing indicators are both measured on a 5-point scale from very poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score among Lehi respondents was 4.09, with 84% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in Lehi was 3.62.

Bar chart. Title: Personal Wellbeing in Lehi. Subtitle: How would you rate your overall personal wellbeing? Data - 1 Very Poor: 1% of respondents; 2: 2% of respondents; 3: 14% of respondents; 4: 54% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 30% of respondents.

Bar Chart. Title: Community Wellbeing in Lehi. Subtitle: How would you rate overall wellbeing in Lehi? Data - 1 Very Poor: 1% of respondents; 2: 9% of respondents; 3: 30% of respondents; 4: 46% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 13% of respondents.

The average personal wellbeing score in Lehi falls just above the average of all cities surveyed in early 2020. The Utah League of Cities and Towns classifies Lehi in the “Rapid Growth Cities” group, along with eight other cities in this study as indicated in the graph below. Lehi is below average on personal wellbeing scores within this group, but there is no statistically significant difference in the average wellbeing score among these cities.

Dot Plot. Title: Overall Personal Wellbeing Scores from Sampled Utah Cities (2020). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Very Poor to 5=Excellent). Group: Established/Mid-Sized Cities. Draper: Average Score 4.24; Bountiful: Average Score 4.11; Cedar City: Average Score 3.99; Tooele: Average Score 3.77. Group: Rapid Growth Cities. North Logan: Average Score 4.23; La Verkin: Average Score 4.18; Eagle Mountain: Average Score 4.14; Saratoga Springs: Average Score 4.14; Santaquin: Average Score 4.11; Hurricane: Average Score 4.09; Lehi: Average Score 4.09; Nibley: Average Score 4.08; Herriman: Average Score 3.99. Group: Rural, Rural Hub, & Resort Cities. Richfield: Average Score 4.12; Helper: Average Score 4.10; Delta: Average Score 3.99; Nephi: Average Score 3.98; Moab: Average Score 3.93.

Wellbeing Domains in Lehi

According to national and international entities tracking wellbeing, a number of common domains make up wellbeing. In this survey, respondents were asked to rate ten domains and also indicate how important they are to their overall personal wellbeing. The domains were rated on a 5-point scale from poor to excellent. The highest rated wellbeing domains for Lehi respondents were Living Standards and Safety and Security. The importance was indicated on a 5-point scale from not at all important to very important. The three most important wellbeing domains were Safety and Security, Mental Health, and Living Standards.


Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings in Lehi. Subtitle: How would you rate your level of personal wellbeing in each of the following categories? Category: Living Standards - 21% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 79% rated as good or excellent; Category: Safety and Security - 25% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 75% rated as good or excellent; Category: Education - 36% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 64% rated as good or excellent; Category: Mental Health - 36% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 64% rated as good or excellent; Category: Physical Health - 37% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 63% rated as good or excellent; Category: Social Connections - 41% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 51% rated as good or excellent; Category: Leisure Time - 48% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 52% rated as good or excellent; Category: Connection with Nature - 57% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 43% rated as good or excellent; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 65% of respondents rated as poor, fair or moderate while 35% 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 Lehi. 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 - 7% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 93% rated as important or very important; Category: Living Standards - 9% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 91% of respondents rated as important or very important; Category: Physical Health - 12% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 88% rated as important or very important; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 14% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 86% rated as important or very important; Category: Leisure Time - 20% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 80% rated as important or very important; Category: Education - 21% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 79% rated as important or very important; Category: Connection with Nature - 25% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 75% rated as important or very important; Category: Social Connections - 41% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 59% rated as important or very important; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 53% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 47% rated as important or very important.

The demographic variables for age, gender, religion and income, and race/ethnicity were significantly related to various wellbeing perspectives among Lehi respondents. These relationships are shown in Table 2 and are based on a multivariate generalized linear model using the categories from Table 1, excluding children in household and employment. Education was not a significant variable.

Table 2

Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and Wellbeing Domains

  Domains Rated Demographic Variables
Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Higher Income Nonwhite or Latino
Wellbeing Ratings
Overall Personal Wellbeing +
vs 40-59 		      +
vs no religious preference 		 +
– 
Wellbeing in Lehi +
vs 18-39 		     +
vs no religious preference		 +
 
Connection to Nature         +  
Cultural Opportunities +
      +
vs no religious preference		     
Education       +
vs no religious preference 		 +  
Leisure Time       +
vs no religious preference 		 +
 
Living Standards       +
vs other religion		 +  
Local Environmental Quality   –  – + 
vs no religious preference		 + 
$150,000+ >
$50,000-$74,999		  
Mental Health +      +
vs no religious preference		 +
 
Physical Health           +
 
Safety & Security         +   
Social Connections       +
vs other religion &
no religious preference
 +  –
  Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Higher Income Nonwhite or Latino
  Domain Importance 
Connection to Nature            
Cultural Opportunities         $75,000-$99,000 
> $150,000+		  
Education –
vs 18-39 		     +
vs no religious preference 		    
Leisure Time –
vs 18-39 		       +   
Living Standards –
vs 18-39 		     +
vs no religious preference 		  $150,000+ > $75,000-$99,000  
Local Environmental Quality            
Mental Health    +   +
vs no religious preference 		    
Physical Health            
Safety and Security       +
vs no religious preference and other religion 		    
Social Connections    +       –  

Wellbeing Matrix for Lehi

The graph below illustrates the relationship between the average rating and the average importance of wellbeing domains for survey respondents from Lehi. Local environmental quality falls into the red quadrant, indicating that it was found to be of higher than average importance, but rated lower than average. It is important to note that all domains except for cultural opportunities have an average rating above 3.0 (moderate) and the importance score for all domains was higher than 3.0 (moderately important).

Scatterplot. Title: Lehi 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, Mental Health, Physical Health, and Education. High rating, lower Importance (blue quadrant) domains include: Social Connections. Lower rating, lower importance (yellow quadrant) domains include: Cultural Opportunities, Connection with Nature, and Leisure Time. Lower rating, high importance (red quadrant) domains include: Local Environmental Quality.

Community Action & Connections in Lehi

Survey participants were asked about community actions and connectedness to community in Lehi. 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 Lehi, the average score was 3.07. When asked about the degree they feel connected to their community, the average score was 2.94.
Bar chart. Title: Community Action in Lehi. Subtitle: In Lehi, to what degree do people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities? Data - 1 Not at All: 5% of respondents; 2: 22% of respondents; 3: 40% of respondents; 4: 28% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 5% of respondents.Bar chart. Title: Community Connection in Lehi. Subtitle: In Lehi, to what degree do you feel connected to your community? Data - 1 Not at All: 9% of respondents; 2: 24% of respondents; 3: 35% of respondents; 4: 25% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 6% of respondents.

In terms of demographic characteristics and community-related questions, religion, income, and race/ethnicity played significant roles as shown in Table 3. Additionally, there is a significant, positive relationship between individuals’ community connectedness and their overall personal wellbeing.

Table 3

Demographic Characteristics and Community Questions

Community Questions Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Higher Income Nonwhite or Latino
Do people in Lehi take action?
    +
vs no religious preference		 $150,000+ > $75,000-$99,999 _ 
Do you feel connected to your community?       +
vs no religious preference		    

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Overall Wellbeing and Community Connection in Lehi. Of the 8 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 1 or 2, 100% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 0% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 36 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 3, 89% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 11% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 138 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 4, 74% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 26% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 84 participants that rate their overall wellbeing as a 5, 49% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 51% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5.

Influence of Landscape on Wellbeing

Survey participants were asked about the influence of landscape features on their wellbeing. Mountains, rivers and streams, trails, city parks, and lakes were found to have an overwhelmingly positive influence on respondents’ wellbeing. Over two-thirds of respondents noted farmland as having a positive influence. Comparatively, only half of respondents indicated red rock had a positive influence on wellbeing.

In terms of development and industry in the landscape, over two-thirds of respondents noted extractive industry as having a negative or very negative influence on their wellbeing. More respondents noted manufacturing industry, residential development, and commercial development as having a negative impact on their wellbeing than a positive impact.

Likert Graph. Title: The Role of Landscape Features in Lehi 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, 4% indicated neither, 96% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Rivers and Streams - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 8% indicated neither, 91% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Trails - 0% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 9% indicated neither, 91% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: City Parks - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 18% indicated neither, 81% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Lakes - 3% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 20% indicated neither, 77% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Farmland - 5% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 24% indicated neither, 69% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Red Rock - 2% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 48% indicated neither, 50% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Commercial Development - 38% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 34% indicated neither, 28% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Residential Development - 42% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 37% indicated neither, 21% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Manufacturing Industry - 40% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 51% indicated neither, 9% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Extractive Industry - 68% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 28% indicated neither, 4% indicated positively or very positively.

Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development in Lehi

Survey respondents overwhelmingly indicated that they felt population growth was too fast (83%). Over one-half of respondents also felt that economic development was too fast (56%), while almost one-third of respondents felt that it was just right (31%). Compared to the other cities in the winter 2020 survey, Lehi had a large portion of respondents indicate that they felt population growth was too fast, and a small portion indicate that they thought economic development was too slow.

Bar Chart. Title: Population Growth in Lehi. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in Lehi? Data - Too Slow: 0% of respondents; Just Right: 12% of respondents; Too Fast: 83% of respondents; No Opinion: 5% of respondents.Bar Chart. Title: Economic Development in Lehi. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in Lehi? Data - Too Slow: 9% of respondents; Just Right - 31% of respondents; Too Fast - 56% of respondents; No Opinion - 4% of respondents.

Likert Graph. Title: Population Growth in Sampled Utah Cities. Herriman - 1% of respondents indicated too slow, 91% indicated too fast; Lehi - 0% of respondents indicated too slow, 83% indicated too fast; Saratoga Springs - 1% of respondents indicated too slow, 80% indicated too fast; Eagle Mountain - 0% of respondents indicated too slow, 72% indicated too fast; Draper - 1% of respondents indicated too slow, 72% indicated too fast; Santaquin - 1% of respondents indicated too slow, 72% indicated too fast; Tooele - 3% of respondents indicated too slow, 70% indicated too fast. North Logan - 0% of respondents indicated too slow, 66% indicated too fast. Moab - 4% of respondents indicated too slow, 64% indicated too fast; Nibley - 0% of respondents indicated too slow, 60% indicated too fast; Hurricane - 2% of respondents indicated too slow, 56% indicated too fast; Nephi - 6% of respondents indicated too slow, 53% indicated too fast; Bountiful - 3% of respondents indicated too slow, 46% indicated too fast; Cedar City - 2% of respondents indicated too slow, 46% indicated too fast; La Verkin - 12% of respondents indicated too slow, 35% indicated too fast; Richfield - 14% of respondents indicated too slow, 18% indicated too fast; Delta - 31% of respondents indicated too slow, 9% indicated too fast; Helper - 22% of respondents indicated too slow, 8% indicated too fast.

Likert Graph. Title: Economic Development in Sampled Utah Cities. Draper - 4% of respondents indicated too slow, 44% indicated too fast; Lehi - 9% of respondents indicated too slow, 56% indicated too fast; Nibley - 19% of respondents indicated too slow, 23% indicated too fast; Moab - 24% of respondents indicated too slow, 62% indicated too fast; North Logan - 29% of respondents indicated too slow, 19% indicated too fast; Bountiful - 35% of respondents indicated too slow, 14% indicated too fast; Cedar City - 44% of respondents indicated too slow, 9% indicated too fast; Saratoga Springs - 45% of respondents indicated too slow, 14% indicated too fast; Hurricane - 47% of respondents indicated too slow, 14% indicated too fast; Herriman - 48% of respondents indicated too slow, 23% indicated too fast; Eagle Mountain - 50% of respondents indicated too slow, 15% indicated too fast; Helper - 52% of respondents indicated too slow, 2% indicated too fast; Nephi - 54% of respondents indicated too slow, 9% indicated too fast; La Verkin - 56% of respondents indicated too slow, 11% indicated too fast; Santaquin - 58% of respondents indicated too slow, 12% indicated too fast; Richfield - 63% of respondents indicated too slow, 5% indicated too fast; Tooele - 63% of respondents indicated too slow, 10% indicated too fast; Delta - 80% of respondents indicated too slow, 0% indicated too fast.

Risks and Assets for Wellbeing in Lehi

Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a major or minor risk or asset to wellbeing in Lehi (see Table 4).

Table 4
Top Rated Risks and Assets by Lehi Respondents

Highest Rated Assets
(indicated by at least 78% of respondents)		 Highest Rated Risks
(Indicated by at least 24% of respondents)
Public Safety Substance Abuse
Access to Quality Food Air Quality
Recreation Opportunities Electronic Devices
Access to Healthcare Roads and Transportation
Employment Opportunities Affordable Housing

Respondents also wrote in other assets and risks as shown in Table 5. It is clear that some people not only listed current assets, but also those they wish Lehi had.

Table 5
Other Assets and Risks Mentioned by Lehi Respondents

Other Assets Other Risks
Availability of city services, libraries (2) Need more police officers, police enforcement of traffic (2) Congested roadways, traffic, roads, need east-west road (4) Growth rate, overpopulation (3)
Street and park upkeep, public transportation (2) Access to variety of activities City council, mayor, city government (2) Mining (2)
Efficient city planning, solar power city incentives Farmland Affordability of healthcare Current library
Fiber internet/internet accessibility Less construction Current library Mormon cliques
Low taxes Need more senior activities People driving distracted Public safety
Open space Polarization Urban parks Wages do not reflect cost of living
Public parks without sports facilities Religion    

Summary of Open Comments

Respondents were given the opportunity to provide comments at the end of the survey. Comments were made by 101 Lehi respondents (34% of those that completed the survey). These comments indicate that Lehi respondents were primarily concerned with issues related to rapid growth and development. Other concerns included changing culture in Lehi, high housing costs and increasing housing density, lack of access to recreation and cultural opportunities, and issues related to natural resources such as mining.

Dominant themes in comments included the following:

  • Dissatisfaction with rapid population growth
  • Concern about overburdening infrastructure
  • Concern about housing density and cost
  • Concern about changing local culture

A Few Quotes:

  • “I realize that housing is in high demand here. I do worry that by continuing to allow too much residential development the city’s infrastructure won’t keep up. The improvements being made now were needed at least 5+ years ago. By the time they are finished we’ll need them again because of the rate of growth being allowed.”
  • “We moved to Lehi because we loved the open farmland, the horse pastures, and the feeling of small town goodness. It has been awful to see this once charming city morph into car congestion, packed schools, and stacked homes. The quality of life in Lehi has been greatly diminished by the out of control growth.”
  • “Please stop taking farmland and putting more and more high density housing. We need space. And to try to slow down the growth. It's been too much too fast…Too many people, too many cars to which the roads and schools can't really handle. ”
  • “Lehi needs to catch up with how many people are moving here. More grocery stores, parks, recreational activities and events are needed!”
  • “Lehi is growing too quickly. Roads need to be widened for the amount of cars on the road. Time to slow building of houses. We need more land. More parks. Not high-density housing.

Pie Chart. Title: Tone of Comment. Data: 5 positive comments, 88 negative comments, 7 mixed comments.Bar chart. Title: Major Themes. Theme: Growth and Development – mentioned 38 times; Transportation – mentioned 34 times; Housing – mentioned 19 times; Social Climate – mentioned 16 times; Natural Resources – mentioned 14 times.

 

 

On This Page