After the Edgewater Hotel redevelopment project failed to pass at a marathon Madison City Council meeting Dec. 15, the project received a second chance Jan. 5 when the council voted to reexamine the project, referring its final decision to a future meeting.
Proposed by Ald. Bridget Maniaci, District 2, the unanimous decision to refer the final vote to the council meeting scheduled for Feb. 23 was met with enthusiasm by supporters who felt giving the developers time to provide more information to the council may garner more votes in favor of the project.
At the Dec. 15 meeting, the council fell two votes short of the 14 required to overturn the Madison Landmarks Commission’s rejection of the project. Ald. Michael Schumacher, District 18, who was absent from the December meeting, had expressed his desire for a reconsideration of the vote.
“I recommended the vote for reconsideration after I knew that multiple alders would be absent during the meeting,” Schumacher said. “The vote ended up being extremely close, and reconsideration seemed right to get everyone’s opinions heard.”
Three alders were absent from the December vote and Schumacher noted the hesitation of many toward overturning the Landmarks Commission decision.
Some members of the public at the meeting voiced their concern that failing to uphold and respect the decision of the Landmarks Commission and the ordinances that determine the aesthetics of the Mansion Hill District, where the Edgewater resides, would be a slippery slope leading to the overturning of future legislation.
Schumacher said emotions ran high following the outcome of the December vote, but raw emotions and finger pointing alone could not determine the project’s fate.
The project developer Hammes Co. has drawn vocal opposition whenever the Edgewater is addressed on committee agendas. Hammes spokesperson Amy Supple said despite the negative portrayal of the project, support for it definitely exists.
“We’ve gotten a ton of feedback. People feel very strongly about this, evident from the amount of people who’ve shown up,” Supple said. “But there’s also a lot of support from residents and businesses, and I think a lot of that’s been lost in the discussion.”
Supple added project managers have been receptive to suggestions from the Urban Design Commission and alders, noting building plans were modified to remove three floors of the proposed building and the top level of the 1970s renovation.
Supple said support for the project among Madison citizens is reflected by many of the alders. She added project developers intend to work closely with alders and committee members to advance the project.
“The reconsideration gives everyone the ability to still move forward,” Schumacher said. “Then when we vote again in February and we find out we can’t live with the project, at least we can all say we tried and found some common ground. That’s going to be the real challenge.”