Laserfiche WebLink
Senior Planner Anderson replied that the gravel road that Commissioner Musgrove spoke about is <br />a private driveway for a shed. He stated that 177th ends in a cul-de-sac, and there is a 35-acre <br />parcel between the end of 177th and the proposed development. He stated that should the property <br />to the west develop, staff was attempting to demonstrate that there could be a logical through street <br />from the 177th Avenue cul-de-sac to the proposed cul-de-sac within this proposed development. <br />He provided clarification on the scope of the proposed development and the potential through <br />street that could be developed if the property to the west were to be developed in the future. He <br />noted that the only access into the development would be Erkium. <br />Commissioner Bauer commented that this sketch plan appears to meet all current City Code <br />regulations, with the exception of the two items noted for variances. He asked if the City would <br />not have to permit this to go forward aside from the two variances. <br />Senior Planner Anderson stated that, other than the exceptions for cul-de-sac length and lot depth <br />for lots five and six, this request would meet all other requirements. <br />Commissioner Bauer stated that if the two variances were not approved and the applicant adjusted <br />their plans to remove the need for the two variances, there would not appear to be any reason to <br />deny the request. He asked about the liability the City would have if it were to deny a request that <br />met all City requirements. <br />Senior Planner Anderson replied that the City would be in a position of a lawsuit if it were to deny <br />a project that met all standards. <br />City Attorney Johnson confirmed that if a project meets all City Code requirements and the City <br />denied it, the applicant would have the ability to sue because that decision would have been <br />arbitrary and capricious. We have to have reasonable reasons to why we say no to something and <br />if it meets our code, we would not have valid reasons to say no and it would fall under arbitrary <br />and capricious. <br />Chairperson Gengler invited the applicant to speak. <br />Tom Dehn, applicant, 11261 Fernbrook Lane Dayton, stated that he is friends with the property <br />owners who reached out to them with interest in development. He stated that City staff have been <br />great to work with throughout this process. He commented that this property has beautiful woods, <br />and their goal is to create homes with values of $1,000,000 to $1,500,000. He stated that their <br />proposal is to minimally clear what is needed for development with custom grading. <br />Commissioner Bauer noted a number of staff comments that were provided and asked if the <br />applicant had concerns with those. <br />Mr. Dehn replied that he believed all of that would be achievable, and there was nothing suggested <br />that would be unreasonable. <br />Planning Commission/ April 23, 2026 <br />Page 5 of 11 <br />