Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Sites topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EDA notes steady industrial interest, asks staff to study buildable area of riverfront 'triangle' parcel
Summary
At its April 15 meeting, the Dayton City Economic Development Authority reviewed a long list of commercial and industrial inquiries — many for warehouse/distribution space — and directed staff to report back on how much of the recently acquired riverfront "triangle" parcel could be made buildable through mitigation or regrading.
The Dayton City Economic Development Authority on April 15 reviewed its summary of commercial and industrial inquiries and directed staff to return at the next meeting with technical analysis of how much additional buildable area can be obtained on the riverfront "triangle" parcel the authority recently acquired.
The authority's economic-development summary shows repeated contact from firms seeking warehouse and distribution sites; staff said many entries are duplicate points of contact and that some inquiries arrived through a Minnesota DEED request-for-information (RFI) process. Planning staff told the authority that one previous project, Scannell, has renewed interest but would have to restart TIF certification and return to the city council for plat approvals because its earlier final plat approval has lapsed.
Why it matters: the triangle parcel sits partially in the 100-year floodplain and includes a narrow, buildable area that the authority hopes to market. Authority members said the parcel's development would affect downtown economic activity, parking needs and the Old Village District's character.
Discussion highlights - Board members and staff agreed the current inquiry list shows the city's market strength but that most near-term interest is for warehouse and distribution uses, which has implications for zoning and infrastructure. - Members asked staff to investigate how much of the triangle parcel could be made buildable through mitigation or regrading, whether outside fill may be allowed, how high the site would need to be raised to move out of the floodplain, and what regulatory permits (including DNR permits) would be required. Staff noted that existing floodway areas impose a hard limit on new structures and that mitigation is feasible in some parts of the 100-year floodplain but not within the floodway. - The authority discussed zoning: three of the four adjacent lots are in a General Mixed-Use district (GMU); one adjacent lot is currently residential (R0) and would require rezoning to consolidate a larger development footprint.
Staff agreed to return to the EDA at the next meeting with answers to the questions members raised, including: how much additional buildable area could be created, what elevation change would be required to clear regulatory floodplain limits, and whether hauling fill onto the site is allowable under state and local rules. Members said any mitigation or pre‑marketing work would be a staff recommendation for EDA consideration before a formal marketing effort.
The authority also discussed the practical market for a small waterfront commercial use, with several members saying a cafe or small restaurant is the most plausible near-term tenant if buildable area can be expanded. No final decision to market the site for a particular use was made; staff were asked to return technical findings and options for the EDA's next meeting.
Ending: Staff said it will bring back concept and mitigation options for the triangle parcel for the EDA’s next meeting so members can decide whether to pursue pre-marketing mitigation or to market the site as-is.
