City of Richland Center officials and county consultants on the Campus Reconfiguration Committee on Tuesday laid out a plan to convert part of a county-owned campus into residential development, emphasizing fast-moving grant timelines and limited local builder capacity.

Nate Day and Brian, consultants hired to analyze market demand, told the committee the county sees about 100 new households per year, with the city accounting for roughly a third. "An aging population will increase demand for senior-oriented multifamily housing while younger buyers stagnate," the consultants said, and estimated that new single-family construction in the area is likely to remain low, at about 10 units per year given current builder availability.

Mayor (Richland Center) told the committee "it's an acute housing shortage," saying local employers have warned they cannot expand without housing for workers. County staff added that the city has "at least $1,500,000 that the city could contribute" toward infrastructure to support a subdivision and that the city would be willing to pair those funds with grant money already allocated to Hive Drive improvements.

Presenters described several scenarios for the 137-acre campus: senior-oriented townhome-style multifamily, selective renovation of the Student Union/theater into an events anchor, single-family conservation subdivisions on hilltop parcels, and parceling a front parking lot for limited highway-facing commercial use. They recommended immediate engineering to produce estimated construction costs and suggested preparing bubble diagrams and an RFP to attract multiple builders rather than relying on a single developer.

Financing options discussed included using congressional or HUD-linked community project funding, CDBG-like grants, and the possible formation of a blight-determined tax-increment financing (TIF) district to fund demolition and major infrastructure. Staff cautioned that TIFs shift tax increment for a multi-decade period and would require joint review board action. The committee was also told a redevelopment grant application is pending and that some grant lines require allocating at least $2,000,000 to secure certain funding elements.

Committee members pressed on site constraints: a large west-side parking lot sits in the floodplain while a smaller front lot near the highway is elevated and potentially suitable for commercial use; at least one pedestrian bridge serving the campus is effectively condemned, and a replacement has been previously estimated near $700,000.

The committee did not make a final decision on land disposition at the meeting. Staff and city officials were asked to return with engineering cost estimates, a clearer breakdown of grant timing and conditions, and draft terms for potential land pricing and partnerships. The committee scheduled a follow-up discussion of the city proposal on the next meeting agenda.