Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Iup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dayton planning commission deadlocks on driveway change for home‑based asphalt business; IUP extension moves to council
Summary
Property owner John Herbus asked the commission to strike a City Council condition requiring removal of a north drive aisle at 15430 Brockton Lane, arguing the alternate route creates higher engine RPMs and safety risks. The commission split on recommending the driveway be retained and likewise tied on a proposed IUP extension; both issues advance to City Council.
John Herbus told the Dayton City Planning Commission on Dec. 3 that keeping a north access drive at his property, 15430 Brockton Lane, would reduce truck noise and safety risks for his family and equipment. "If I go up the new steep piece they're asking, I'm hitting 8,000 RPMs, 6,000 RPMs, and that motor is just roaring," Herbus said while describing how using the alternate approach forces higher revving and more reversing on the hill.
Staff reminded commissioners that the interim use permit (IUP) for the site was approved in February 2025 (Resolution No. 11‑2025) with a council‑added condition requiring removal of the north drive aisle by the end of 2025. The property is A‑1 agricultural; the IUP covered about one acre of an overall 10.93‑acre parcel and authorized staging and limited vehicle parking for an asphalt and concrete service operator. Staff said a November 20 inspection found the site otherwise in compliance and that no complaints had been lodged to date.
Commissioners weighed competing concerns. Several members said the topography and the applicant’s description of noise reduction made retaining the drive aisle reasonable, while others said the planning commission should be cautious about overturning a condition that City Council explicitly added. "I don't think it's the role of the planning commission to say that's not a good decision" that the council made, one commissioner said, noting the council can revise its own conditions.
Because the commission lacked a majority recommendation, it first voted on a motion to recommend that City Council allow the north drive to remain. That motion failed on a 2‑2 tie, leaving the council condition intact for now. The commission then separated the applicant’s request to extend the IUP term from the driveway question and considered recommending a full five‑year term (bringing the permit to a Feb. 11, 2030 horizon). That motion likewise resulted in a tied vote and therefore the commission issued no formal recommendation on the extension.
Both the driveway amendment and the IUP‑term extension will be taken up by City Council, which is scheduled to hear the matter in early December. Commissioners urged the applicant to bring neighbor letters and other evidence to the council meeting to show neighborhood acceptance or compliance with city conditions. The council, not the planning commission, has the authority to alter the added condition.
The commission’s record notes staff will continue to monitor compliance; if conditions on the IUP are violated the permit can be revoked or requirements enforced. The record of discussion and the split votes will be included in the packet sent to City Council.
