That question was decided on Thursday, January 28 when the Reynolds Surplus Property Disposal Committee voted 3-2 to allocate 60%-75% of the site to housing and 25%-40% to gardens/open space.

While there are still outstanding elements that remain to be finalized before the "Request for Proposal" is made available to developers, the late January meeting marked a milestone in a process that has covered many years and numerous meetings. In the late 1970's, a preliminary concept plan was developed that would provide for new housing on numerous City-owned land parcels, including those in the Old Market Place Neighborhood. Critical to this development plan was the land owned by the Reynolds Transfer and Storage Company in the 600 Block of East Mifflin and East Dayton Streets. At this time it was deemed necessary to make an exchange of City-owned land in the 700 Block of East Mifflin Street for the Reynolds' property.

In 1983, the City began negotiations with Edward and David Reynolds for the exchange of the properties. In February 1987, a letter of agreement was signed by the Reynolds brothers agreeing to the exchange of Reynolds and City land. In September 1987, the Common Council adopted the "Reynolds Homestead Tax Increment Finance District #17" which would provide the financing for public improvements, land acquisitions and loans and grants for residential development and rehabilitation.

In April 1989, the "Reynolds Homestead Redevelopment Plan" received Common Council adoption. This action gave the Community Development Authority (CDA) the statutory right to begin land acquisition and movement toward the fulfillment of its goal of central City revitalization through the creation of housing and promotion of housing rehabilitation "which will strengthen and stabilize an existing housing neighborhood." The Reynolds Company and City land exchange was cited as a key element of that Plan.

In June 1995, the "Tenney-Lapham/Old Market Place Neighborhood Plan", prepared by a Mayor-appointed neighborhood based steering committee, was adopted by the Common Council. The plan included the recommendation for the prompt development of "key neighborhood tracts" including the Reynolds Property.

During 1996, negotiations on the land exchange continued with the surfacing of a proposed resolution near the end of the year. On December 17, 1996, a resolution was introduced in the Common Council approving the exchange.

Beginning in April of 1997, numerous events occurred that culminated in the property transfer. At the April meeting of the Old Market Place Neighborhood Association, the question of using the Reynolds Property for community gardens was raised. Over the next six months a number of steps were taken. First a substitute resolution was adopted that stated that the Reynolds Property City would be received and "converted from commercial property to residential or public use." Then, during the summer, the Reynolds Surplus Property Disposal Committee was formed, appointed and approved. At the August 5, 1997 Common Council meeting, a resolution conveying title of the Reynolds Property to the City of Madison was introduced. During the meeting, the resolution was referred to the Plan Commission with a request to hold a public hearing. After a lengthy September 8 public hearing, the Plan Commission approved the land transfer and voted to "reaffirm the existing plans recommending the development of housing for this property."

Following these actions, the Reynolds Surplus Property Disposal Committee convened and had its responsibilities for the disposal of the property identified. Part of that responsibility dealt with the need to respond to a resolution adopted by the Common Council when the property was transferred to the Community Development Authority (CDA). This resolution recommended "a housing and/or public use development." At the completion of that first meeting, it was decided that public comment would be solicited through public hearings to be scheduled for the next two meetings on December 17, 1997 and January 14, 1998.

Early on in the hearing process, public support for both housing and gardens began to materialize and take sides. During the first public hearing three people registered to speak, one person each for housing, gardens, and housing and gardens on the site. At the second public hearing, the number of people representing either themselves or groups, who chose to speak for one of the three uses, increased significantly. In addition to the speakers, a number of information pieces from various community organizations relating to associated economic, technical & social issues were submitted to the committee for their consideration.

At the beginning of the most recent meeting, there appeared to be consensus among committee members that the site should accommodate both housing and gardens. As the meeting progressed, it became a question of how much of the site would be allocated to housing and how much to gardens. At the conclusion of the meeting, the question of how much of the Reynolds Property should be housing or gardens was answered but the more delicate concerns of building massing, architectural style and distribution of bedrooms per unit were left for another meeting.

On a related matter, the Old Market Neighborhood Association invited Tom Neujhar, of Urban Land Interests, to speak about the development potential of the Reynolds Property at their February 10 meeting. Early in his comments, Mr. Neujhar stated that he felt that the future of the city center, meaning the Square, is tied to the surrounding neighborhoods. "The neighborhood is essential to retaining the commercial component" of that center he stated. Regarding the Reynolds Property, Mr. Neujhar said that the proposed development should match the same density as the surrounding area. He said the architecture need not be historic but "it should have elements showing that it belongs." When asked what he felt would make the project "affordable", he replied that the affordability equals the quantity of space and levels of finish of each unit. The biggest limitation that Mr. Neujhar saw to the project would be creating parking.

-David Mandehr