Board of Aldermen split over height of proposed Branson skyscraper

[BlogBot]

Originally Posted by BlogBot

At their September 26, 2006 regularly scheduled meeting, the Branson Board of Aldermen voted, by a six to zero (6-0) margin, to reduce the size of a proposed 25 story skyscraper to 12 stories. The proposed skyscraper is to be constructed as part of a $100 million multi use retail and resort complex to be constructed at the junction of U.S. Highway 65 and State Highway 248 in Branson. The complex is being jointly developed by HCW Development Company, of Branson, and Evergreen Investments, of Lebanon. At their regularly scheduled meeting on November 27, 2006 three of the those that voted for the reduction of the building to 12 stories at the September 25 meeting, alderman Gas, Martin, and Barker reversed their position. The tie vote of the council was broken by the Mayor as he voted in favor of the reversal. The reason the issue was voted on again was because of alleged problems with the way the ordinance passed at the September 26 meeting read.

Read the full blog entry.

[TheOleSeagull]

Because we are moving into a new phase of the sky scraper issue, the two previous threads, which are still on line and available for viewing under this forum, entitled, “Branson's Skyscraper has a little taken off the top...” (09/26/06) and “Like a certain pink bunny, Branson’s 25 Story Skyscraper just keeps on going, and goi..” (10/15/06) have been closed and all posts on the sky scraper should be made to this thread.

On Sep. 27, in a post to the thread “But could the top grown back on Branson's Skyscraper?” the Ole Seagull posted a comment entitled, “But could the top grown back on Branson's Skyscraper? In which he said, “Now I know we don't bet here in Branson but what are the odds that if the developer does a feasibility study, and that study shows that they need a 25 story building to make it financially feasible, that the board won't change their minds and give it to them? Somehow, in my heart of hearts, I just don't believe this issue is over yet.” Although they found a different reason, the result is the same. For the record, as the Ole Seagull said in his column of Oct. 15,entitled, “Mea culpa, couldn't a 25 story skyscraper symbolize the experience and expectation that is 'Branson?''' he has no problem with the building being built in that spot as long as no taxpayer funding is used. His problem is with the way things were done.

[Theophilus]

Having attended the meeting last Monday, I have to say, it was definitely a doozy. Of course, everyone wanted to make sure their voice was heard, but I'm not sure there was actually a whole lot of room for anybody to change their minds. I appreciated a couple of the Aldermen sharing that the reason for voting the way they did was principle - it's what they believed was the best decision.

I'll be particularly interested, when the next hearing happens, to see how things go with one Alderman in particular. I absolutely disagreed with his decision, but had to respect that he made it on principle, not because "that's what I'm hearing from a lot of folks." He stated that he wasn't sure which way he'd vote about the full 25, but believed it ought to be all or nothing (that's my paraphrase).

The mayor's been pretty consistent about which way he'll go, so if it's going to be stopped, it's going to have to be a 4-2 or better against the building...and I'll be surprised out of my socks if it's less split than that, either way.