Dayton EDA directs staff toward commercial‑retail plan for Refsland property

The Dayton Economic Development Authority on June 17 voted to pursue a commercial‑retail concept for the EDA‑owned Refsland property, choosing a plan that emphasizes street‑facing retail and upper‑floor residential over a city‑owned event center.

The direction came after staff summarized four concept plans prepared by Stantech: a 12,000 ft² event center for about 250 people; a 7,500 ft² brewery/outfitter with river viewing; three 2,500 ft² flexible retail bays; and a commercial‑retail plan featuring a 5,000 ft² corner retail building and a 2,700 ft² restaurant with four upstairs apartments. Staff emphasized that most of the property is within the 100‑year floodplain and that any fill must be compensated elsewhere on the site.

Members who favored Option 4 said it would avoid placing a municipally operated event facility in competition with private venues, better fit the historic village/streetscape approach the city has adopted, and allow the EDA to sell to a developer rather than operate a long‑term facility. Committee member Scott said he favored Option 4 and urged staff to consider how the parcel could be expanded later if adjacent land became available.

The EDA directed staff to flesh out a strategy to achieve the desired outcome: frame design and program expectations, engage commercial realtors and developers (the meeting referenced a commercial realtor identified in the transcript as IG), and prepare an RFP or sale terms that describe the city’s priorities for river access, floodplain compliance and downtown compatibility. Staff noted Option 4 focuses attention toward the street rather than the river and may be easier to implement without additional property acquisition.

Members discussed floodplain constraints at length. Staff reiterated that the floodway (the portion of the river corridor that must remain free of fill) cannot hold structures, and any filled area in the 100‑year floodplain requires compensatory storage. That constraint shaped members’ preference for design solutions that emphasize nonstructural river access (paths, pergolas, or flood‑tolerant landscaping) rather than additional buildings in the green area.

The EDA’s direction is procedural: staff were instructed to test financial feasibility with developers and return with recommended procurement steps and preliminary design parameters. No formal land sale or contract was authorized at the meeting; the item will return as staff refines procurement materials and feasibility analysis.

The EDA moved into closed session after completing the agenda.