After failing to provide a plan compatible with neighborhood standards in November, the Edgewater Hotel redevelopment will once again go before the city’s Landmarks Commission next month in an attempt to assuage some of the concerns regarding the design’s appropriateness.

Project developer Bob Dunn, president of Hammes Co., announced yesterday in a press release the redevelopment would resubmit the project to the commission after it failed to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness last year.

By failing to receive the certificate, the $93 million project needed to receive a supermajority vote in City Council to overturn the ruling, which it failed to do by only two votes in December.

The aim of the Landmarks Commission is both to oversee the designation, preservation and enhancement of areas determined to be of historic value, as well as to determine the compatibility of new developments within historic districts, Madison General Ordinances state.

Changes to the project’s design in recent weeks have addressed a number of concerns expressed by city staff, commissioners and members of the public, Dunn said in a Hammes Co. statement.

Recent meetings with both the city’s Urban Design and Plan Commissions have highlighted some progress for the project as a whole, he added.

“The project has changed fairly significantly since it was last before the commission,” Hammes Co. Development Director Amy Supple said.

Among the changes cited by Supple were the building being taken off of the right of way of Wisconsin Avenue, modification of the parking structure and setting back the top two floors of the tower to help reduce the perceived mass of the building as a whole.

The primary concern of the commission the last time the project came before it was the volume of the building, an issue Supple said has hopefully been addressed through design changes.

Ald. Bridget Maniaci, District 2, both represents the area in which the redevelopment may take place and serves on the Landmarks Commission. The decision to return to the commission is a well thought out one, she said.

“There’s a couple things that have changed as to the standards that Landmarks has to look at,” Maniaci said. “The building that came to them was a very neo-classical design, and the design they are looking at next month is very different.”

She added going back to the commission makes sense for the project given the substantial changes to the designs and the possibility for the project to receive additional input as to its compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.

Provided the project does not encounter any major unforeseen pitfalls, it will go to vote before City Council in April for final approval.

“I think this really has to do with making sure that everything is covered properly,” Maniaci said. “I know that council members will be wanting an up to date Landmarks opinion on the project as a whole.”