Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dayton planners begin defining new A‑3 agricultural district to allow smaller rural lots
Summary
The Planning Commission opened a multi‑hour policy discussion on creating an 'A‑3' agricultural district that would permit smaller, unsewered hobby‑farm lots using averaging rules aligned with Met Council guidance. Commission requested more research on minimum developable area, soils and septic feasibility before recommending a boundary or minimum lot sizes.
Planning staff outlined a policy effort to establish an A‑3 agricultural district that would create an interim, unsewered rural residential option in parts of northwest Dayton. The conversation focused on two central questions: where to draw the district boundary and what minimum lot sizes or developable‑area rules should apply.
Speaker 7 (planning staff) said the intent is to preserve rural character and encourage hobby farms while allowing flexibility by using an average density that would meet Metropolitan Council standards. "The Met Council would allow density averaging to 1 home per 10 acres," staff said, explaining that averaging lets some lots be smaller while larger parcels offset the overall density.
Commissioners and members of the public discussed tradeoffs. Commissioners suggested distinguishing between gross minimum lot size and minimum ‘developable’ area (the dry, buildable portion of a lot) and proposed ranges: a buildable minimum of about 1.5–2 acres and gross minimums commonly discussed as 3–5 acres with a 10‑acre averaging target. Several commissioners emphasized that other ordinances—animal‑unit rules, outbuilding allowances and setbacks—must be aligned so small lots can actually support hobby‑farm uses.
Landowner testimony urged practical, financially feasible minimums. Jack Burnens, a landowner in the area, suggested 2–3 acres as a minimum that would be economically viable once road, utility and site costs are considered. Commissioners asked staff to consult septic design expertise, examine soils variability (sand vs. clay), identify parcels that could be subdividable under proposed rules and invite a Met Council representative or city attorney input on legal constraints.
No formal boundary or numeric minimums were adopted; staff will produce draft maps, perform additional technical research (septic, soils, sewer staging) and return to the commission for further direction. Commissioners signaled an intent to move cautiously and to prioritize clear policy language before sending recommendations to the City Council.
