Layton City residents express concerns over proposed PRUD development plans

The Layton City Council convened on May 15, 2025, to discuss several pressing issues, primarily focusing on a proposed Planned Residential Unit Development (PRUD) that has sparked significant community concern. The meeting featured a range of public comments from residents, highlighting their apprehensions regarding the impact of the development on local property values, neighborhood character, and safety.

The session began with a resident expressing concerns about their property being surrounded by public access due to the new development. They requested the council to consider alternative designs that would mitigate the impact on their home while still allowing for trail connectivity. The resident emphasized the importance of proper engineering to prevent potential hazards, referencing recent landslides in nearby Draper as a cautionary example.

Another resident, Becky Anderson, voiced gratitude towards Council Member Thomas for engaging with the community but criticized the council's handling of the PRUD proposal. She urged the council to adhere to Layton's zoning statutes, arguing that the proposed development does not align with the existing character of the area and could pose risks to the health and safety of residents.

Michael Christiansen spoke on behalf of 27 families supporting the development, arguing that Layton's housing market is becoming increasingly unaffordable. He highlighted the need for new housing to accommodate the growing population and criticized the notion that the council should prioritize the interests of wealthier residents over the community's need for affordable options.

In contrast, Preston Miller, a renter, expressed strong opposition to the development, asserting that it would cater primarily to affluent buyers and not address the needs of average residents. He raised concerns about the proposed trail's proximity to homes, suggesting it would isolate properties and diminish their value.

David Tends Meyer also shared his worries about the PRUD, focusing on potential traffic issues and the stability of the area, which he felt could negatively affect future homeowners.

The council's discussions reflected a tension between the need for development to meet housing demands and the residents' desire to preserve the character and safety of their neighborhoods. As the meeting concluded, the council acknowledged the complexity of the issues at hand and the importance of considering community feedback in their decision-making process. Further discussions and potential votes on the PRUD are anticipated in upcoming meetings, as the council seeks to balance development with resident concerns.