Richland County committee reviews options to repurpose downtown campus; architects map justice center, jail, parking scenarios

The Richland County Campus Reconfiguration Committee met in open session and discussed next steps for repurposing the county-owned downtown campus, heard a presentation from Venture Architects on conceptual layouts for a law enforcement center, justice center and related renovations, and reviewed an interim inventory and transfer of campus equipment to local schools and the public library.

Committee members were told staff and volunteers have been moving usable lab equipment, tables, projectors, a smart board and books from campus buildings to nearby school districts and the library, and that the campus foundation is working to donate a specialized plotting machine to a school or a printing company. A staff member said, "There's nothing. I met with Mike today. He hasn't had any communication with the OE system, so said he would probably reach out," describing coordination to place usable items.

Committee chair and members heard a 40-minute presentation from Corey of Venture Architects, who showed plan diagrams of the existing downtown campus and multiple conceptual approaches for meeting county space needs while maintaining access to existing facilities. "This is the existing campus," Corey said while displaying a site diagram, and described options that would connect a new law enforcement center to the courthouse and a new justice center so detainees and judicial staff would have a controlled path between buildings. He also noted a statutory constraint: "If the courts go out there, it would have to be, in the county seat" and later, "That's a legislative requirement." The committee discussed closing a street and acquiring adjacent properties to expand the campus footprint, building up (adding floors) on portions of a law enforcement building, and alternatives that would place some functions off-site.

Corey identified several site- and design-level tradeoffs the committee should weigh: added cost to add floors or underground parking, the need for additional parking stalls if properties are purchased or demolished for new construction, and different pricing for each concept. He estimated a typical schedule if the county proceeded now: about 12 months for design and approximately two to two-and-a-half years for construction of a first phase, or roughly 3.5 years until initial occupancy, depending on phasing and scope.

Committee members asked Venture Architects to evaluate a vacant parcel in the North Industrial Park; Corey said the firm will assess any GIS/site information the committee provides. The committee also discussed off-site options, but staff and the consultant agreed that some remote parcels would need annexation or infrastructure, and that locating a justice center outside the county seat would present statutory barriers. A committee member noted the city had received a roughly $2 million grant to extend infrastructure to a peripheral site but that grant has been reprioritized; Corey said if infrastructure were required for a new off-site facility, the county would likely need to fund it.

On disposition options for the campus property, staff described three approaches the county could pursue: keep and repurpose the property; engage the Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission to run an RFP to solicit proposals for reuse and handle public engagement and the technical work of an offering; or list the property with a real estate agent. Staff said the regional planning commission could draft an RFP that includes restrictions (for example, excluding storage units) and run public engagement so the county would not have to staff that process internally. The commission has offered to appear at the next committee meeting to explain the RFP process and cost.

Committee members also mentioned community housing models, including a Habitat for Humanity approach discussed at a recent housing summit; one member volunteered to share materials from that summit at the next meeting. The committee identified a set of planned maintenance and improvement tasks that would likely be funded or matched by the University of Wisconsin System award discussed in the meeting; staff said a detailed spending plan is required before requesting those funds. The committee discussed two bridge projects and parking improvements as potential uses for that funding; a committee member cited a planning figure of $6,700,000 for one bridge.

Votes and formal actions taken during the meeting included approval of the meeting agenda (motion by Frank; second by Williamson), acceptance of the April 30 minutes as printed (no questions raised; chair declared approved), and a unanimous vote to move into a brief closed session for discussion of a potential future use of campus buildings (motion by Manning; second by Frank). The committee reported no actions resulted from that closed session. The committee set its next meeting for June 4 at 5 p.m. and asked staff to invite the Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission and to have Venture Architects return with updated cost and parking information.

The committee's planning discussion emphasized that any decision on a new justice center must account for statutory requirements about the county seat, infrastructure costs for peripheral sites, and tradeoffs between renovating existing buildings and building new facilities off-site. Venture Architects will provide revised cost and parking options, and the Southwestern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission will be invited to explain running an RFP to solicit proposals for property reuse at the next meeting.