[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6076550,"mediaKeyId","2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d","parentId",2969289,"title","Council approves rezone, concept plan and development agreement for Davis Behavioral Health campus housing","audioSeconds",1418,"startMs",6462000,"endMs",7880000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d&start=6462&end=7880","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d/thumbnail_6462000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6076550/Utah/Council-approves-rezone-concept-plan-and-development-agreement-for-Davis-Behavioral-Health-campus-housing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076550-bf0d9b1ccfc263dc960bd6f2128d1c3e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770500682&Signature=ID5aRJluTQEmoe-BEL9VOrEPdV~4UYeoMpIg0I2Ff62p-sXWOtQ7y7XF0dTI-RGtTEUflc2aO9HnVmh~yKGv2z4KCk9~zXc71Cbt-0hlHOC1HH5UK0PE6IV3SRgRGLCdy0nOFt1K~aCtYaGhLeUu0mnItcDT6145J0DiCp~M~oR7hwwh6cI6dSdNMCXRrA4dbPP4bAMNdrLBw~BqzXst0SNJr31klxH6Kp9lWjAG0Uu2m33XpEirYos-9oR3nlL70q9BWwVL~IowIYwB3T4ne56NrvCJVJ0N-JGn98UnFyo3f8RtyE2BoHL~E7XIHqcRT5YiKEpGgBDlzy2LfUVR9g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-11T05:47:02Z","article","Layton City Council voted unanimously April 10 to rezone a 5.8-acre parcel north of the existing Davis Behavioral Health building from CH (planned highway commercial) to MU (mixed use) and to approve an associated development agreement that allows a phased campus for Davis Behavioral Health.

The most immediate elements of the approved concept are a street-facing commercial/operations building with office and service space and a southwestern campus containing residential buildings. Applicant Sam Ball of Assist Community Design Center said the project will provide permanent supportive housing and on-site services for Davis Behavioral Health clients. \"It is staffed full time, so 24/7,\" Ball told the council.

Nut graf: Supporters and staff framed the plan as permanent supportive housing and services, not transitional or institutional detention. The development agreement commits the applicant to constructing a commercial maintenance building during phase 1b and requires on-site pedestrian and transit improvements.

Key project points: Staff described the concept as compatible with the city’s mixed-use strategies for major corridors, with pedestrian access to Main Street and improved bus-stop facilities. The first phase includes a 60-unit apartment building; the conceptual campus shows up to 180 units across three phases with supportive services and connections to the adjacent clinic. The planning commission had unanimously recommended approval.

Vote and motion: Councilmember Tyson Roberts moved to adopt Resolution 25-17 and Ordinance 25-09 to rezone the parcel and approve the development agreement; the motion was seconded and carried unanimously in roll call (Roberts: yes; Bloxham: yes; Morris: aye; Smith Edmondson: aye; Thomas: aye).

What happens next: The development agreement sets phased construction terms and requires details for parking, pedestrian access, and a schedule for the commercial building. Staff will continue to work with the applicant on final site and construction plans.

Ending: The rezone and agreement passed on a unanimous vote, allowing Davis Behavioral Health to proceed to engineering, preliminary platting and building approvals under the approved concept and development-agreement requirements.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Layton City Council Meeting April 10, 2024","oneSentenceSummary","Layton City Council voted unanimously April 10 to rezone a 5.8-acre parcel north of the existing Davis Behavioral Health building from CH to MU and to approve an associated development agreement allowing a phased campus for Davis Behavioral Health.","taxTitle","Layton City Council, Layton, Davis County, Utah","taxId",23419,"location","Utah","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6076545,"Council approves four consent items including park irrigation realignment, street lighting bid and subdivision amendments",3235,3215000,6450000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d&start=3215&end=6450","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d/thumbnail_3215000.jpg","/articles/6076545/Utah/Council-approves-four-consent-items-including-park-irrigation-realignment-street-lighting-bid-and-subdivision-amendments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076545-2c91323d8a9950bd353cc33b30c1dec5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770490198&Signature=oUfV1hZ76mmh0NyPGbrqXI8HDd7LblSBOY7PGO3BNOuxLOYxzK~uvRgCPgK7kLlcFaa3~hjSpPVgmR0jv1AghAFQFy9kZQXsTMZP9i8fJ8lsMcM~ykNrrBBGJYvt3GVOBaCRcDTK2miFebOdrH3OIJszfL4-vkcnGytQfFQ2ohoJwXDRIP1RMGcqq3zy1FP2xsboEHiU-gdVAT7vyFG6MhjxmWrKFJPYw-FoIZYly0IRTX5Ts9nmI-ZRW8oKsC1dnoHwtwdBdSLMp6Z-zzsUmmVHzDAmCqqvgt6uc93IQPcomYqiZzofGZO55jMKPgxMkg0g-LdGQ~LZeWN4XSFM6Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Layton City Council adopted four consent items at its April 10 meeting in a single bundled motion.

The consent package and highlights:
- Parkridge payback agreement (Resolution 25-20): Staff explained the developer, Parkridge Incorporated, installed roughly 100 feet each of sewer and water main and a larger storm drain in the Ridgeview East Subdivision. The agreement allows the city to reimburse up to $21,705.06 to the developer from benefiting properties as they connect.

- Nature Conservancy / Case Creek irrigation realignment (Resolution 25-21): The council authorized an agreement with The Nature Conservancy and Case Creek Irrigation Company to realign irrigation piping and exchange water shares so a pressurized secondary water line can be routed through the future Case Creek Estates Park. The Nature Conservancy will construct and maintain the new pipe and apply for required U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits.

- Constitution Circle pedestrian lighting (Resolution 25-22): The city accepted Cache Valley Electric’s low responsive bid of $182,650 to install 22 pedestrian light poles and two street poles. Staff excluded a lower apparent bid that failed to include required surveying and irrigation repairs.

- Tennis Academy amended plat (plat amendment): The council approved an amendment to the Tennis Academy of Utah subdivision to increase the lot size to accommodate outdoor tennis and pickleball courts; the planning commission had recommended approval.

Vote: Councilmember Matthew Bloxham moved approval of all consent items; the motion carried on a voice vote with no objection.

Ending: Staff will execute contracts and agreements as authorized and proceed with the respective implementation steps, including reimbursement tracking, permitting and construction bidding.","Layton City Council adopted four consent items at its April 10 meeting in a single bundled motion.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6076554,"Neighbors press council to reject or revisit PRUD rezone for Hobbs Creek area; council tables decision to May 1 for geotechnical review",5044,4956000,10000000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d&start=4956&end=10000","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d/thumbnail_4956000.jpg","/articles/6076554/Utah/Neighbors-press-council-to-reject-or-revisit-PRUD-rezone-for-Hobbs-Creek-area-council-tables-decision-to-May-1-for-geotechnical-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076554-95d910c320d3733c1e5712ff4899dc59/orig.mp4?Expires=1770500682&Signature=lKg56wOrQZDLdt96sbwcuYemCamqztuZsteftdmr94U2ASWu1dK12B57FpQUVOaVFAGAqZfgQ1z2kiwkk-UJTZ5T5xwwpDglL-FORlwQncSWYXGde9hKU0bwspvp~D3o3X-sh7lh8YJfnP-o2yaVgSBUTY9sc1GclH6WZP~lBfbWM0qpVo3QRi7QQLNgvThhDt3v6NEXQjaCAAJ9pi4WFKvv1rnNidMxKI7ObT0iT3P3baBIj~tlsSVj3MTXYsB-jpmmw~fxZ8l90nsGrdXmVuXChqQTMg~xCwvBwKcXXkUhCOBQ~LJTxZtS-X4ODXMngs-sKAN2aFuhlXKm3Mz4Yw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Layton City Council on April 10 heard dozens of residents oppose a proposed 27-unit Planned Residential Unit Development (PRUD) on a 13.38-acre hillside parcel west of Highway 89, and moved to delay a final decision while the city’s independent geotechnical reviewer prepares a briefing.

The proposal, presented by developer Adam Anderson on behalf of Goldcrest Homes, would rezone the site from RS (suburban residential) to R-1-10 with a PRUD overlay and place 27 single-family pads (19 detached and eight attached) on a parcel that includes steep slopes, areas identified as greater than 30% grade and a mapped fault scarp. The developer described foundations, engineered rockery walls and other mitigation measures intended to manage slope stability and surface-water infiltration.

Nut graf: Residents said the site’s documented geology and recent local slope failures make the PRUD inappropriate for the neighborhood. The council closed the hearing and, after deliberation, tabled the rezone request to the May 1 meeting and asked the city’s third-party geotechnical reviewer to present its assessment to the council and the public.

What residents raised: Multiple speakers said the parcel is too geologically active for the proposed density. Justin Anderson, a nearby homeowner, presented imagery of a recent slide on a comparable slope and said approving denser development would risk property damage and reduced values for neighboring homes. \"This site is within a documented sensitive land overlay,\" Anderson said. Other neighbors said the proposed private amenities and trail alignment would remove existing trees, increase public access near private yards and fail to place open space where it would be most usable.

Developer’s position: Applicant Adam Anderson said the design responds to the geotechnical constraints. He said clustering houses, placing basements on native soils, installing engineered retaining walls and limiting landscape irrigation reduce slide risk: \"The most imperative thing on this is to control the amount of discharge that's coming from man made discharge ... don't put water on this site, period,\" he told the council.

Council discussion and action: Council members and staff noted the property’s sensitive-lands status and explained the review process. Councilmember Clint Roberts moved to table the rezone and concept-plan request to the May 1 council meeting and asked staff to arrange for the city’s independent reviewer (GeoStrata) to present its peer-review findings. The motion passed unanimously on voice/roll-call.

What happens next: The item will return to the council May 1, with the city’s third-party geotechnical reviewer scheduled to brief council and address resident questions on slope stability, drainage design and structural mitigation. Staff also was asked to return information about trail alignment options and possible protections for existing trees.

Ending: The council did not approve or deny the rezone. The May 1 briefing will be the next public opportunity for technical discussion before any legislative decision by the council.","After extended public comment focused on slope stability, groundwater/runoff and trail alignment, the council closed the public hearing on the Hobbs Creek Villas PRUD and voted to table action until May 1, requesting the city’s third-party geotechnical reviewer attend for a technical briefing.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6076559,"Layton council opens public discussion on Wasatch Integrated membership amid resident concerns about landfill changes",6825,1385000,8210000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d&start=1385&end=8210","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2969289-63cecea6bde2a819a664080d89adeb5d/thumbnail_1385000.jpg","/articles/6076559/Utah/Layton-council-opens-public-discussion-on-Wasatch-Integrated-membership-amid-resident-concerns-about-landfill-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6076559-089dca2672c9ec3514b156d8c6f1c760/orig.mp4?Expires=1770500682&Signature=hrmKQQD~234~sMBGlABKh8Sr8TS3NTPSxKmNprUOc1C0-l1BGSQKK0ZzkPEyhERJr2kmerG7CYJxcxZiaKTP3sgtj7ccGkkKSQ41PAdgFUHQLXfUoChSfpm1xIuCDJ5xO8Lh0qlG0DDwjyvOaKOfRZ9uro~llDbwtzqWtG7r03SvbKFjETk-MVqhORZ6L-2l~mrFzu6XEg2GU0B-hAxD6eybkkBgyD91v~0DlVPvVswIbQZenfdvAFEAIHNHcRS0AbznFeMHalY~hhRRegVUp~03ZUCL8Dxh~KlHGr1W4XwtKyBG8nMM55ObO-MWU3Vf87Bx-HIa5un4yws~RzbEig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Layton City Council members and the mayor spent much of their April 10 meeting addressing resident questions after the city notified the county and the Wasatch Integrated Waste District of its intent to explore options for leaving the district.

Mayor Joy Petro and multiple council members told residents the letter the county received was an initial, legally required step and not a final decision. \"We are not out of the district in July unless they let us out,\" Councilmember Matthew Bloxham said, calling the letter \"the first in a long line of steps\" and urging residents to stay engaged.

Why it matters: Layton is the largest waste generator in the district and council members said the city’s single vote on district governance does not match the revenue Layton contributes. Council members and staff said they have been analyzing financial impacts and enforcement questions for months and wanted to open the issue to public scrutiny and comment before pursuing any formal steps.

What council said: Councilmember Bloxham described the city’s move as a fact-finding and negotiating effort, not an immediate change in service. \"This is just the first in the long line in scheduling,\" he said. Councilmember Bettina Smith Edmondson said the council had pressed the district earlier to rescind a plan to mandate recycling, and credited the district for converting the mandate to an incentive-based approach after city feedback.

Public concerns: More than a dozen residents spoke during the meeting. Common themes were the future cost of dumping and green-waste service, the life expectancy of local landfill capacity and how a withdrawal would affect rates for occasional dump trips. Resident Henry Simpson said he values the district’s drop-off services: \"I would be horrified if I could no longer dump my yard waste for a reasonable fee. $50 is too much,\" he said.

Council response: Council members repeatedly said the city continues to support recycling but objected to a mandate imposed without prior consultation. Councilmember Tyson Roberts and others said staff have gathered detailed usage and household-adoption data and will continue to work through options with the district and the county. The mayor said staff and the council will seek public input and more analysis before any formal decision.

Process and next steps: Council members described the city’s letter as notifying the county commission (the body that must consider any withdrawal) and starting a public process. The mayor emphasized the city remains a district member until formal county action, and encouraged residents to monitor the city’s postings and participate in future meetings.

Ending: No vote on membership was taken at the meeting. Councilmembers said they expect more public discussion and additional analysis before any formal action is requested of the county commission.","Layton City leaders defended a recent letter signaling intent to pursue options with the county over Wasatch Integrated and held a wide public discussion on recycling, landfill life and possible withdrawal; no action to leave the district was taken and the council said the letter began a long, public process.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council approves rezone, concept plan and development agreement for Davis Behavioral Health campus housing

Council approves four consent items including park irrigation realignment, street lighting bid and subdivision amendments

Neighbors press council to reject or revisit PRUD rezone for Hobbs Creek area; council tables decision to May 1 for geotechnical review

Layton council opens public discussion on Wasatch Integrated membership amid resident concerns about landfill changes