Eau Claire RDA outlines housing-overlay and Uptown redevelopment districts, debates RDA role in affordable housing

RDA staff presented expanded boundary proposals for a housing-overlay (selective redevelopment) district and an Uptown District and asked the board whether to proceed toward formalizing plans for council review later this year.

The housing-overlay discussion would add Shawtown to the RDA’s selective redevelopment area, targeting older housing stock and small infill opportunities. The Uptown District map was expanded north to the river to include property around Marshfield Hospital and south to include TID 16 (Shopko Plaza area), officials said. Staff described both areas as candidates for surgical, targeted redevelopments rather than broad, wholesale takedowns.

Aaron described a range of housing tactics the RDA is considering, including a pilot program of detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) sized at roughly 560 square feet. “This product meets 65 or so percent of the waiting list for the housing authority’s waiting list for housing,” Aaron said, explaining the units could target households needing a studio or one-bedroom unit. Under the city’s draft code, detached ADUs would not need to be smaller than the primary structure; staff described placing two small, detached units on a single lot as a design option.

Board members discussed whether the RDA should own and temporarily operate affordable units or instead facilitate development by other entities. One board member said they were “a little concerned with the RDA being a landlord,” asking for clearer scope and benchmarks. Aaron outlined a potential model where the RDA acquires and readies sites, the housing authority manages day-to-day operations and tenant screening under an MOU, and the RDA eventually transfers ownership to the housing authority after an agreed period. Aaron said the housing authority already manages roughly 300 units and could administer the properties; any management agreement would include a management fee and reserve accounts funded from collected rents.

Board members flagged several issues they want to see addressed before formal approval: clear benchmarks for success (for example, an affordability target for a district), the financial implications of RDA ownership (including what funds would be tied up), tax consequences while properties are owned by a public entity, and whether other developers could access the same RDA tools. One board member suggested exploring conversion from RDA to a community development authority (CDA) to handle long-term ownership functions, and staff said they were already reviewing differences and could bring analysis to council.

Timeline and next steps: staff said they will prepare a more formal proposal for the October RDA meeting, incorporate board feedback over the next two weeks, and — if approved by the RDA — bring the districts to City Council for review and approval in December. Staff framed the goal as having the new districts set at the start of the 2026 budget year but said the timeline could be extended if needed.

Other housing-related items noted in the meeting: RDA staff reported contacts with about 50 developers on the city’s marketing list, said there are no hard offers yet for some parcels, and noted that recent minor declines in interest rates may rekindle developer activity. Staff also said HAWK (an entity referenced in the meeting that manages local housing grant funds) expects to have $250,000 available in the 2026 CIP and roughly $500,000 in carryover/rolling funds to allocate via a competitive grant process; staff said HAWK is reviewing its scoring matrix to make it more flexible for non-LIHTC projects. Staff said they have also been approached by parties interested in creating a community land trust to preserve affordability.