Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates site-plan review thresholds; leans to preserve oversight for sizable additions
Summary
Dayton planners discussed whether additions to permitted commercial buildings should trigger planning-commission review. Options considered included a 10% threshold or a numeric floor (e.g., 5,000 sq ft); commissioners split, but many favored keeping commission oversight for significant additions and asking staff to draft clearer thresholds.
The planning commission discussed whether to change how the city triggers site-plan review for building additions to permitted commercial uses.
Staff explained current rules: any new non-residential development requires plan review, but an administratively approved site plan can allow limited follow-on expansion (the commission discussed a commonly used 10% administrative allowance). The 10% allowance prompted debate: for very large buildings 10% can be a substantial absolute square footage, so commissioners considered adding a numeric cap (for example, 5,000 square feet) so that large projects would return to the commission for review.
Arguments on both sides were practical: supporters of the cap said the commission should see large expansions because they can change site circulation, landscaping, stormwater and neighborhood impacts; those opposing more mandatory reviews said small additions impose costs and delay for businesses and that staff can handle code compliance checks in many cases.
A compromise direction emerged: keep the administrative allowance but add a secondary numeric threshold so that a large absolute addition would require commission review. Commissioners also discussed eliminating a five-year 'sunset' on administrative allowances; opinions were mixed. Staff will prepare draft ordinance language for the commission to consider.
