PHOTO: Pagosa Baking Company, one of the more popular businesses in the East Village.
In an editorial a few days ago, discussing the high cost of rent in Pagosa Springs, I shared an image that a Daily Post reader had sent me, showing a studio apartment in Manhattan’s East Village — one of the more expensive districts in America, in terms of housing costs.
The small New York apartment was renting for about the same price a similar studio apartment now rents for, here in Archuleta County.
But of course, a worker’s wages in Archuleta County are a fraction of what a similar worker would be paid in New York City.
We do, however, have our own East Village.
Around the same time I was writing that editorial, I was forwarded an email discussing a controversy in Pagosa’s own East Village — a formerly residential neighborhood just east of our town’s historical downtown commercial district, where nearly all of the residential homes have now been converted to non-residential, commercial uses.
The name, “The East Village”, was dreamed up as part of an effort by developer David Brown — back in about 2005 — to get the Town government to re-imagine this residential neighborhood as part of the commercial tourist resort that Mr. Brown believed Pagosa was destined to become. Some of Mr. Brown’s concepts were then included in a new ‘Downtown Master Plan’ encouraged by Mr. Brown and his advisors.
This was the first time the Town government had developed a plan specifically centered on the downtown commercial district. The 135-page Downtown Master Plan was subsequently adopted by the Town Council as an official policy document. You can download it here. (Large file, may take a while to download. But interesting reading.)
In 2006 and 2007, Mr. Brown was in the process of buying up residential properties in the East Village, and demolishing them to make room for future commercial development.
But although most of the remaining East Village homes have indeed been converted to commercial uses (and have thus been removed from Pagosa’s limited housing stock in the downtown area) these formerly-homes-now-businesses generally retained their residential shape and size. Their residential ‘character’, you might say.
Thus, the term ‘Village’. A somewhat unique, somewhat quaint business district that still resembles a residential neighborhood.
Enter Reynolds Ash and Associates — a local architecture firm — and their clients Dirty Rose LLC, owners of three formerly residential parcels in the East Village that were converted into vacant lots many years ago by David Brown. Mr. Brown had originally proposed a two-story mixed use building on these lots, in a rather modern style, with commercial shops on the first floor and apartments or condos on the second floor. Then the Great Recession arrived and the plans were shelved, waiting for the economy to recover. Mr. Brown passed away in 2013, however, and the parcels have since remained vacant, awaiting a development that would presumably align with the ideas for the East Village, which are included in the Town’s adopted Downtown Master Plan.
From the plan:
Between 3rd Street and 1st Street lies a corridor along Pagosa Street (Highway 160) that is commercial in use but was historically residential. As a result this district has a residential feel in both site layout and building design. The traditional residential structures establish a “village” scale that provides a distinct image for the area. The relative scale of these structures and the details incorporated into the porches and gable ends of buildings contribute to the visual aesthetics. Landscaped front yards also enhance the experience. The East Village offers an opportunity to expand the supply of specialty retail and a variety of housing options in the downtown…
The East Village area should maintain the traditional development patterns established by original residential uses in this neighborhood while accommodating adaptive reuse for commercial activities. New infill and redevelopment should respect adjacent development in mass and scale…
This is the official policy of the Town of Pagosa Springs.
But Dirty Rose LLC and Reynolds Ash & Associates have developed plans for 232 Pagosa Street that seem to ignore the Downtown Master Plan’s intentions regarding ‘mass and scale’. The proposed building is one of the tallest in the entire downtown area, and occupies, essentially, the entire three parcels. It would measure about 40,000 square feet and would stand about 40 feet tall… dwarfing the nearby businesses and homes.
Below is a drawing of the proposed structure, originally submitted to the Town Planning Commission on July 12, 2022. At that meeting, the audience had been unanimous in its opinion that the massive building did not fit the character of the East Village neighborhood, and the Planning Commission had agreed with that assessment. The architects were instructed to redesign the building.
The project came back before the Town Planning Commission on September 13.
The ‘new and improved’ version.
Here is how it looked:
We note at least one obvious change. The protruding building component on the right (a restaurant?) is now painted white. Also, some additional windows have been added.
And there’s more traffic shown on the highway.
The developers had invited several friends to attend the meeting, to argue in favor of the ‘new and improved’ building design. Also, several downtown residents spoke in opposition to the building design. In the end, the Design Review Board approved the ‘new and improved’ building design, with some conditions attached.
That’s not the end of the story, however.
An email, originally sent to certain citizen activists and subsequently shared with the Daily Post, raises questions about the ‘scale’ of the proposed Dirty Rose LLC project, and additionally, proposes to do something about those questions.
Hi Folks,
I’m contacting you because you participated in the public process that led to the Downtown Master Plan.
We want to share with you that we have filed an appeal in response to the Design Review Board’s approval of the building plan for 232 Pagosa Street. We very much want to see those 3 lots developed. And we want the development to be in alignment with the LUDC and the Downtown Master Plan. The current plan is out of compliance with both the setbacks and the mass and scale set forth in the guiding documents. Neighbors behind us facing Lewis Street have also filed an appeal.
I served on the LUDC Advisory Committee, tasked with updating the code in 2009. Perhaps some of you participated in the 2005 and 2006 public workshop process that led to the Downtown Master Plan. It was a community effort, defining the vision for Pagosa , and we want to see that vision followed through on.
I expect the appeal to go before the Town Council at the November 17 meeting.
There is a link to the staff’s agenda brief to the [Design Review Board] below. Thanks for taking a look at it…
Kathy
Here’s that agenda brief.