Residents urge Dayton City to pause Dean development, citing wells, traffic and drainage risks

Several Fernbrook Lane residents told the Dayton City Council that a proposed Dean development (referred to in city materials as DCM) should not proceed as currently planned, saying the project’s commercial elements — including a proposed gas station and convenience store — would worsen traffic, lighting and groundwater risks for long-time neighbors.

Patricia Grover, a Fernbrook Lane resident, told council that the south end of town already has multiple gas stations and questioned the need for another. “Why would you think that the south end of town needs 7 gas station convenience stores or even 5?” Grover said during the meeting’s open forum. “The traffic will be ridiculous. Children will ride their bikes on Fernbrook Lane to go spend their money and hang out.”

Grover also raised groundwater and septic concerns, saying many nearby houses rely on private wells and that stormwater and wash water from a car wash or gas station could reach those wells. She said she has contacted the pollution control agency and the state board of health and urged the council and developer to “follow those rules exactly.”

Kathy Powers, who also lives on Fernbrook Lane, said she opposes rezoning farm land in the DCM area for commercial or retail use. “I am totally against making farm commercial or retail,” Powers said. She told council the city has not adequately addressed pedestrian and traffic safety on Fernbrook — including requests for a four-way stop near a church and a crosswalk for children walking to a park — and said adding residential and commercial traffic would exacerbate existing safety problems.

Lee Hallquist, another Fernbrook Lane resident, described ongoing drainage problems he traces to nearby development and said he has been sump-pumping year-round. “I’m pumping 750 gallons an hour,” Hallquist said, describing what he called persistent groundwater infiltration since adjacent construction began. He urged the city to investigate whether prior approvals and the removal of wetlands in favor of holding ponds contributed to higher groundwater levels.

Keith Grover, also of Fernbrook Lane, asked the council to enforce the city’s comprehensive plan and ordinances rather than repeatedly allowing developers to request smaller lot sizes or different setbacks. He said proposed new lots are often smaller than earlier phases and expressed concern about loss of buffer zones and increased wildfire risk where lot spacing is reduced.

The public comments spanned traffic safety (including mail delivery and pedestrian crossings), potential contamination of private wells, noise and lighting from commercial operations and loss of the city’s rural character if the developer’s plan proceeds unchanged. Residents repeatedly asked the council to address existing water drainage and traffic issues before approving additional commercial or residential construction.

City staff and council members did not adopt any new approvals during the public comment period; speakers’ remarks were referred to staff for follow-up as part of the city’s open forum process. Several residents referenced prior planning-commission approvals and asked the council to revisit those decisions or require additional studies.

A staff follow-up item was discussed later in the meeting concerning stormwater projects and funding (see separate article). Residents asked that any future review of the Dean/ DCM proposals include updated traffic and drainage studies and clear descriptions of how private wells and septic systems will be protected.

A record of these public comments is part of the meeting minutes and will be referred to staff for response and any further action the council directs.