PART 2 of 2
Madison has often been considered a haven for those who think progressively, but the recent Edgewater saga calls into question whether or not the city and its approval process are conducive to a continually developing community.
""People classically, both in exasperation and very proudly, say, ‘We do things a certain way here,' and so I don't know what the solution for that is,"" Ald. Bridget Maniaci, District 2, said.
Last fall, the Landmarks Commission denied Hammes Co. a certificate of appropriateness for its Edgewater redevelopment project, which is located in the historic Mansion Hill district, because the proposed tower was too tall.
Hammes Co. then appealed the decision to the Common Council, which delayed its final vote until its meetings this week, allowing the project to go through multiple committees before a final decision is made on whether significant hardship was imposed upon the company.
According to Ald. Bryon Eagon, District 8, this has allowed important changes to be made to the plans, such as cutting the proposed tower to eight floors.
""I'm encouraged with the changes that I feel have strengthened the project as a whole,"" he said.
However, the project has also been met with controversy regarding the view of the lake it could block and possible zoning violations, in addition to the tax incremental financing required to pay for the redevelopment.
""One of the biggest discussions now is how TIF is used … in comparison to surrounding communities,"" Eagon said. ""And how TIF polices might either attract or deter possible investments based on the standards that we apply [in Madison].""
TIF loans allow the city to fund projects using the tax revenue generated by the same development project.
To move forward, the Edgewater project would require a $16 million TIF loan. The Board of Estimates was prepared to discuss this at its meeting last week, but ultimately delayed its decision.
In addition, Madison's 44-year-old zoning code is in the process of being revised. Under the existing city ordinance, Hammes Co. could not build any closer than 140 feet from the shoreline of Lake Mendota.
However, the Plan Commission is granting an exception in this case, allowing the potential new tower to be built the same distance from Lake Mendota as the existing hotel—16 feet.
According to Robert Dunn, president of Hammes Co., completing the project requires a balancing act between ""complicated issues.""
""Oftentimes it feels like any one issue or any one voice may have a tendency to tip the scale out of balance,"" he said.
Many Mansion Hill residents have been vocal in opposition to the proposal, saying the tower would block the lake view and not blend in with the existing neighborhood.
Other citizens have spoken in favor of the redevelopment as a way to attract tourists and create jobs.
""Also, the lake access created by the new development is desperately needed,"" Eagon said.
Maniaci remains skeptical of whether the revised proposal will pass the Council.
""There's nothing in terms of the design that's changed that really changes the standards and the criteria to which the council would look to override Landmarks [Commission's decision],"" she said.
The original version of this article incorrectly stated the Common Council would vote on overturning the Landmarks Commission's decision on Feb. 23 and Feb. 24.
