Image above: Architect’s rendering of the proposed 232 Pagosa Street mixed-use building.
As mentioned in Part One, the Pagosa Springs Town Council will hold a special meeting tonight at 5pm at Town Hall, to deal with several important items.
The most complicated piece of business on the agenda appears to be an appeal hearing.
Back in September, the Town Planning Commission approved the design of a three-story mixed-use building planned for three vacant lots on Pagosa Street (aka Highway 160) tucked between the Pagosa Baking Company and the Alley House restaurant.
The three vacant parcels, and the proposed three-story building, are now being referred to as 232 Pagosa Street.
The two neighboring buildings, the Pagosa Baking Company building and the Alley House building, were originally constructed way back when as residential homes, but — like almost all the formerly-residential properties along Pagosa Street — were converted to commercial use over the past 30 years or so. The Pagosa Baking Company building includes a commercial bakery downstairs and a vacation rental unit upstairs. The Alley House has operated as a restaurant, under various names, for at least 30 years, and recently added a modern expansion that pretty much doubled the seating area, and also, I presume, doubled the need for parking.
The public on-street parking along Pagosa Street, in front of the vacant lots, is typically well-parked in the morning hours with vehicles belonging to Pagosa Baking Company customers, and with cars belonging to Alley House customers during the evening hours.
Presumably, some of the generous off-street parking designed into the proposed 232 Pagosa Street structure is intended to serve Alley House customers — the Alley House being owned by one of the partners involved in the 232 Pagosa Street development project. But that is merely a presumption.
The Town Planning Commission looked at the 232 Pagosa Street proposal last July and determined that the design failed to meet the intent of various Town regulations and planning documents. The architects were asked to bring back a design that better met the Town’s land use requirements.
For one thing, the vacant property is within the ODE overlay — the ‘East Village’ regulatory district — and new development is required to be “compatible” with other buildings within the overlay district, in terms of land use and architectural design.
One of the characteristics of architectural design is, of course, size.
Height, and mass.
The Town’s Land Use and Development Code includes some illustrations related to the ODE district, such as this one, below — so that architects have some guidance concerning what the Town will or will not approve:
I have placed a gray overlay on the photos illustrating the types of building designs acceptable in the ODB district — the Downtown Business District, which is located to the west of the ODE. In the lower section of this illustration, we see the type of new development the Town expects to see in the East Village, labeled as “This”.
An unacceptable architectural design is also shown, labeled as “Not This”. The building shown as “Not This” would not even be acceptable in the Downtown Business overlay district, which is much more lenient in terms of height and mass.
We might — if we were so inclined — compare the “This” and “Not This” photographs with the drawings of the mixed-use building proposed for 232 Pagosa Street. Here is the rear elevation.
People may disagree about what they are seeing with their eyes, but to me, the rear elevation of the proposed 232 building looks a lot more like “Not This” than like “This”.
The rest of the existing East Village, meanwhile, more closely resembles “This”.
Possibly, the Town Planning Commission had the “Not This” photograph in their minds, when they rejected the 232 Pagosa Street design back in July.
Then, in September, the architects brought forward to the Planning Commission, a design that looked almost identical to the design presented in July. At least, it’s my own personal opinion that the design was not changed in any significant way. Not speaking as an architect or urban planning professional, of course.
Here are the East and North elevations from July, which were deemed unacceptable by the Planning Commission.
In July, the Planning Commission sent the architects back to the drawing board to produce a development that aligned better with the photograph labeled “This”.
Below are the East and North elevations as presented to the Planning Commission in September, which were unanimously approved.
The owners of two neighboring properties apparently feel rather strongly that the design approved by the Planning Commission in September was “Not This”.
The Land Use and Development Code (LUDC) allows citizens to appeal a Planning Commission decision to a higher authority, which is, in this case, the Town Council.
There is also an authority higher than the Town Council, to which citizens can appeal a decision; namely, the Sixth Judicial District court.
The Town Council appeal hearing will be held tonight at 5pm at Town Hall. It’s my understanding that the general public will not be allowed to testify, but we can watch and listen.
Also on the evening’s agenda are a couple of other interesting items.
4. Resolution 2022-27, Adopting 2023 Fee Schedule
5. Scope of Hwy 160 and Piedra Road Intersection Crosswalk Facility
6. Division of Housing Grant Application
7. Appointments to Committees and Boards
8. CDBG Grant Application for Build Pagosa Technical/Trades Building
The agenda brief for the ‘Division of Housing Grant Application’ (number 6) discusses a $10 million grant opportunity for which the Town feels qualified, based on its ongoing negotiations with Dallas-based student housing developer Servitas for up to 98 units of workforce housing.
Staff is submitting the required Letter of Intent (LOI) on December 10th for the Town’s interest in applying for up to $10,000,000 to be directed to the Town’s Enclave Rental Apartment project. DOH staff will review the LOIs and determine who to invite to apply for grant application deadline on January 1st, the first grant application deadline. This grant program has a rolling application deadline of the first of each month until all funding has been depleted. A recent webinar regarding the grant had 250 attendees, thus staff believes it is important for the Town to apply during the first round.
You can download the Division of Housing Grant agenda brief here.
You can download the entire agenda packet here. This includes all of the information for the 232 Pagosa Street appeal hearing. Click the Agenda Packet link at the top of the page.
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.