Public Policy Bulletin Board
Edgewater Proposal Approved
05/20/2010
It was appropriate that after a long process that lasted over a year and filled with contentious debate that the final meeting for the Edgewater renovation proposal required an epic 14-hours of public debate. GMCC staff testified at the meeting and encouraged alders throughout the night (and morning!) to support the proposal because of the significant public and private benefits it would provide to the region.
The proposal needed approval on five key issues. Here’s how alders voted.
Conditional Use Permit – passed on a voice vote
Approval of the Planned Unit Development (required 15 “yes” votes)
Yes – (16) - Sanborn, Maniaci, Cnare, Bidar-Sielaff, King, Eagon, Skidmore, Solomon, Schmidt, Bruer, Kerr, Palm, Compton, Clausius, Schumacher, Clear
No – (4) - Phan-Remmele, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Verveer
Overturn Landmarks Commission (required 14 “yes” votes)
Yes – (14) - Sanborn, Maniaci, Cnare, Bidar-Sielaff, King, Eagon, Skidmore, Schmidt, Bruer, Palm, Compton, Clausius, Schumacher, Clear
No – (4) - Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon, Verveer
Absent – (2) – Kerr, Pham-Remmele
Amending 1965 ordinance – vacating a portion of Wisconsin Ave – passed on a voice vote
Approval of TIF request (required 11 “yes” votes)
Yes – (12) - Maniaci, Cnare, King, Eagon, Skidmore, Schmidt, Bruer, Palm, Compton, Clausius, Schumacher, Clear
No – (6) – Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Sanborn, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff
Absent - (2) – Kerr, Pham-Remmele
In the end, the Edgewater received the necessary approvals to move forward. Our thanks to the Mayor and all of the alders who showed tremendous leadership in voting “yes” for this worthy project.
In the end, the Edgewater received the necessary approvals to move forward. Our thanks to the Mayor and all of the alders who showed tremendous leadership in voting “yes” for this worthy project.