Community voices support denial of project at Telluride's "Gateway"
No one is quite sure how long it has been since the Telluride Historic and Architectural Review Commission has denied an application, certainly not a project as large as the Clark's Market expansion.
In the history and practice of the organization created to guarantee the national historic architectural character of the town, it is indeed rare.
But last week HARC did just that, setting the three-year-old project into a tailspin. Exhausted by the conflict of economics and the visual impact of the project, which at points would reach 48 feet in height, the plan for the 20,000 square foot grocery store, plus six new units of deed-restricted employee housing, six new free market condominiums and 24 parking spaces below, most of the members decreed that the project created the wrong kind of architectural statement for the so-called "Gateway" to the Town of Telluride.
While recused HARC Chairman Chance Leoff waited outside the building as the rest of the commission deliberated, the appearance of community support to deny the project based on issues of "mass and scale" made it easy to overcome his main concern: That the remaining board members might succumb to the political pressure from the city fathers, or, the refusal of the project directors to reduce the scope and, especially, square footage, to reduce the impact.
"We are here and the application is not architecturally compliant," HARC Vice Chair Sonchia Jilek told the board and those present at the special meeting to discuss unresolved issues prior to the commission granting a "certificate of appropriateness." "A lot of our guidelines have been overlooked. I cannot approve this project. I don't see why we are continuing this process."
Those sentiments were echoed by commission member Joe Waller, who lamented the project designer's inflexibility in reducing the size of the project, or, at least, finding architectural solutions to the problems of "mass and scale."
"I have never met an applicant who says he has to have a certain size or he's not going to build the building," he said. "It's time to deny this application and not continue with it."
While commissioner Chris Myers attempted a diplomatic approach, trying to keep the HARC process going, Jilek responded that "I can't figure out a way to move this forward at this point."
Other than town planner Mike Davenport, though obviously ailing, who attempted to keep the discussions going, the only board member who spoke in favor of the project was Harley Brooke-Hitchin. She said the project was within size limits granted by the town planning process.
"I think it's very good looking," she said of the building designed by architect Dan Hunter. "I think it meets the guidelines, but what you are saying is we can't approve unless we change the square footage."
Arguing the economic success of the development needed the additional space for the condos to defray the costs of the grocery store's expansion, Hunter said he didn't have the authority to agreee to a reduction in size.
"Regarding mass and scale, we get down to the issue of what does it cost to Tom Clark to build these buildings," he said. "The condos pay for a fraction of this market addition."
He said it was unfair for board to ask the applicant to reduce the "mass and scale," which is largely determined on a subjective based on design elements that create perspective, is really "about square feet."
Then, expressing his frustration with the empasse, he said, "We are about at the end of our ... for what we can do for you with mass and scale. It doesn't seem like there is anything we can do for mass and scale ... for us to come back to you.
"We're clevered out, folks."
During the community participation portion of the meeting, residents spoke for an against the project, but the weight of criticism carried the day.
"The financial aspect of this project should not be considered," Ken Hodges said. "If they can't do it, they can't do it. It seems like a decision has been made there."
Based on a general concern that the project might further damage Telluride's status with national historic preservation organizations, several community leaders soke at the meeting, including Bob Saunders, a town councilman who spoke only as a citizen, and Rick Silverman.
"The community is behind you guys," Saunders told the panel, "for you to do what it is your job to do. The mass and scale is too big, and we all understand that."
Rick Silverman said the project affects more than just the neighbors of the project.
"You are the final seige gates," he said, urging HARC to vote against the building that is "not in compliance with the historic architecture of Telluride."
The board meeting dissolved into a discussion about whether to go on from the outset. During an examination of the steps taken to extend the distance between the two buildings, the texture and color of the brick used, and the visual effects of the varieted combination, HARC board member Waller questioned whether it was effective to attempt to reduce the mass and scale as requested by simply changing the material.
More to what the majority of board members had in mind, he asked, "Are you willing to change the square footage on the third floor?"
Hunter responded, "No."
While the official language of the imminent denial will be worked out this week, the commissioners listed such items as reducing the West Elevation face of the project, broadening the width and separation of the main two buildings, and finding some way to use setbacks to help reduce the "mass and scale."
In the history and practice of the organization created to guarantee the national historic architectural character of the town, it is indeed rare.
But last week HARC did just that, setting the three-year-old project into a tailspin. Exhausted by the conflict of economics and the visual impact of the project, which at points would reach 48 feet in height, the plan for the 20,000 square foot grocery store, plus six new units of deed-restricted employee housing, six new free market condominiums and 24 parking spaces below, most of the members decreed that the project created the wrong kind of architectural statement for the so-called "Gateway" to the Town of Telluride.
While recused HARC Chairman Chance Leoff waited outside the building as the rest of the commission deliberated, the appearance of community support to deny the project based on issues of "mass and scale" made it easy to overcome his main concern: That the remaining board members might succumb to the political pressure from the city fathers, or, the refusal of the project directors to reduce the scope and, especially, square footage, to reduce the impact.
"We are here and the application is not architecturally compliant," HARC Vice Chair Sonchia Jilek told the board and those present at the special meeting to discuss unresolved issues prior to the commission granting a "certificate of appropriateness." "A lot of our guidelines have been overlooked. I cannot approve this project. I don't see why we are continuing this process."
Those sentiments were echoed by commission member Joe Waller, who lamented the project designer's inflexibility in reducing the size of the project, or, at least, finding architectural solutions to the problems of "mass and scale."
"I have never met an applicant who says he has to have a certain size or he's not going to build the building," he said. "It's time to deny this application and not continue with it."
While commissioner Chris Myers attempted a diplomatic approach, trying to keep the HARC process going, Jilek responded that "I can't figure out a way to move this forward at this point."
Other than town planner Mike Davenport, though obviously ailing, who attempted to keep the discussions going, the only board member who spoke in favor of the project was Harley Brooke-Hitchin. She said the project was within size limits granted by the town planning process.
"I think it's very good looking," she said of the building designed by architect Dan Hunter. "I think it meets the guidelines, but what you are saying is we can't approve unless we change the square footage."
Arguing the economic success of the development needed the additional space for the condos to defray the costs of the grocery store's expansion, Hunter said he didn't have the authority to agreee to a reduction in size.
"Regarding mass and scale, we get down to the issue of what does it cost to Tom Clark to build these buildings," he said. "The condos pay for a fraction of this market addition."
He said it was unfair for board to ask the applicant to reduce the "mass and scale," which is largely determined on a subjective based on design elements that create perspective, is really "about square feet."
Then, expressing his frustration with the empasse, he said, "We are about at the end of our ... for what we can do for you with mass and scale. It doesn't seem like there is anything we can do for mass and scale ... for us to come back to you.
"We're clevered out, folks."
During the community participation portion of the meeting, residents spoke for an against the project, but the weight of criticism carried the day.
"The financial aspect of this project should not be considered," Ken Hodges said. "If they can't do it, they can't do it. It seems like a decision has been made there."
Based on a general concern that the project might further damage Telluride's status with national historic preservation organizations, several community leaders soke at the meeting, including Bob Saunders, a town councilman who spoke only as a citizen, and Rick Silverman.
"The community is behind you guys," Saunders told the panel, "for you to do what it is your job to do. The mass and scale is too big, and we all understand that."
Rick Silverman said the project affects more than just the neighbors of the project.
"You are the final seige gates," he said, urging HARC to vote against the building that is "not in compliance with the historic architecture of Telluride."
The board meeting dissolved into a discussion about whether to go on from the outset. During an examination of the steps taken to extend the distance between the two buildings, the texture and color of the brick used, and the visual effects of the varieted combination, HARC board member Waller questioned whether it was effective to attempt to reduce the mass and scale as requested by simply changing the material.
More to what the majority of board members had in mind, he asked, "Are you willing to change the square footage on the third floor?"
Hunter responded, "No."
While the official language of the imminent denial will be worked out this week, the commissioners listed such items as reducing the West Elevation face of the project, broadening the width and separation of the main two buildings, and finding some way to use setbacks to help reduce the "mass and scale."
posted by Unknown at 11:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home