Council directs stabilization plan and invites developer to revisit redevelopment proposal for Weinbrenner building
Loading...
Summary
After an extended staff briefing and council debate, Marshfield council directed staff to prepare a stabilization plan for the historic Weinbrenner building, invited developer Jay Jeffers to update his proposal, and recorded concerns about financing, historic tax-credit uncertainty, environmental hazards, and parking.
The Marshfield Common Council on Feb. 24 spent extended time on the future of the Weinbrenner building (305 West 3rd Street), directing staff to prepare a stabilization plan with cost estimates and inviting developer Jay Jeffers to return in two weeks with a refreshed redevelopment proposal.
City administrator Steve Bargue summarized prior RFQs and developer outreach, reported a 2025 appraisal estimating the property value at approximately $1,300,000 (about $200,000 for land and $1,100,000 for the structure), and warned that significant renovation costs are likely. Bargue said staff anticipate assuming full maintenance responsibility when Weinbrenner vacates its temporary location "by July 1, 2026," and that the 2026 budget includes $35,000 designated for initial stabilization work. Bargue listed immediate priorities: securing and weatherproofing the building, implementing security and monitoring to reduce vandalism risk, and scoping environmental testing and hazardous-material surveys (lead‑based paint and asbestos were cited).
Staff presented four options for the site: 1) pursue affordable housing (developer interest previously existed and federal/ state tax credits could help); 2) market the property publicly for proposals; 3) hire a professional market/feasibility analyst; or 4) clear and prepare the site (demolition) as a last resort. Council members debated tradeoffs: some urged revisiting an affordable‑housing plan with Jeffers to avoid rising maintenance costs and vandalism; others insisted on clearer cost estimates and a written stabilization plan before authorizing expenditures.
Two council motions carried: one inviting Jay Jeffers to present an updated proposal within two weeks, and a second directing staff to prepare a stabilization plan outlining tasks and cost estimates (council noted $35,000 in the 2026 budget but expressed concern that true stabilization costs likely exceed that amount). Bargue and others emphasized coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to avoid actions that could jeopardize historic eligibility.
What happens next: Staff will draft a stabilization plan with estimated costs and return to council; the council will meet with Jay Jeffers if the developer can present an updated proposal. Council asked staff to check the status of historic-tax-credit eligibility and to consider environmental testing, parking constraints, and financing options such as TIF or tax credits. No redevelopment contract or sale was authorized at the meeting.
Key figures and facts from the meeting: a 2025 appraisal value of about $1.3 million; council‑budgeted stabilization funds of $35,000 in 2026; a redevelopment cost estimate cited in staff discussion of roughly $26,000,000 by a prior firm (to be validated).
