Telluride Town COuncil 'Calls Up' the Clark's Project
By Douglas McDaniel
The controversial Clark’s Market expansion into a 48-foot high, 20,000 square foot grocery store with two additional floors for six units of employee housing and six new free-market condominiums, unable to past muster under the town’s architectural review guidelines, is being taken to a higher court.
However, an even higher court, local voters, may be waiting in the background.
Two council members – Stu Fraser and Andrea Benda -- have requested a “call up” of the Clark’s Market expansion after HARC denied the applicant’s request.
In a situation that’s just short of an institutional crisis over the town’s goal of preserving the historic architectural status of the town, the implication of an override of the decision made by the Telluride Historic Architectural Review Commission could inspire opponents of the project to pursue a referendum to defeat any possible reversal of HARC.
But first the three-year-old Clark’s Market saga must take a strange turn. The next episode will include a rarity: The Telluride Town Council will assume the role of HARC.
Rather than a review of the HARC decision to deny the project, largely over issues of “mass and scale,” the council will erase the blackboard on the 59,000 square foot building project, creating a virtual ‘do over.’
“They have taken jurisdiction of the Clark’s proposal,” Telluride Town Manager Frank Bell said. “It’s in their court now.”
He said the special session at 10 a.m. on Jan. 23 at Rebekkah Hall will provide the council with the options of either upholding the HARC decision, overturning the denial and approving the project outright, or, approving it and sending it back to HARC to work under new instructions.
The Town’s land use code allows the council to take such actions, he said.
However, only six of the council members will be able to vote in a case that requires a simple majority. That’s because Councilman Bob Saunders, who spoke as a local citizen against the proposal during the last HARC meeting prior to the denial, is recused from voting on the matter because he lives close to the project.
With Fraser, the council’s liaison to HARC, and Benda, who has spoken recently about reforming the entire HARC process, moving to keep the Clark’s application alive, the ball is in the hands of remaining members Mayor John Pryor, Councilwomen Roberta Peterson and Jill Masters, and, Councilman Mark Buchsieb. If there’s a 3-3 tie in any future vote, that will mean the project will remain unapproved.
All members of the council, including the recused Saunders, declined comment on the pending case, but many other players in the process are speaking out loud and clear.
“The reality is if HARC makes a decision and council overturns it, then what’s the point of having HARC?” asked HARC Chairman Chance Leoff, who also has been recused from the process because of his home’s proximity to the project.
He said if the HARC decision is reversed, then a ballot initiative may be launched.
“If we are going to stray this far from what’s normally allowed, then the public should have a chance to weigh in on what this is going to be,” he said. “The public is the highest court, isn’t it?”
Local architect Calvin Wilbourne, a former HARC chairman who also publicly spoke to the need to address the “mass and scale” issues during the architectural review hearing that led to a denial, said there is enough public sentiment against the project to get the signatures for a referendum.
“There are enough people around to do it right now,” he said of a potential voter initiative, adding that when the council meets Jan. 23 “that whole place will be full. It’s going to be very vocal. It’s a very active group (that’s opposed).”
Linda Levin, Town deputy clerk said the number of signatures equired to put it on the ballot is based on the percentage of registered voters in the last election. Typically, the town has a 1,000 or so voters, which means approximately XXX valid signatures would be needed for a successful initiative campaign.
However, another observer who has included his voice in the public process, Jonathan Augello, an architectural designer, believes both HARC and the architect for the Clark’s project, Dan Hunter, could have gone further to remove the impasse.
“It’s a conservative board with conservative rules, so it’s tough,” he said of HARC. “But they were real, real close. They could have just made it with just a little more effort.”
Augello said he was in favor of the visual impact of the building, especially considering the current state of the property with its large dirt-lot parking lot and odd sense of Victorian style and commercial utility.
“It’s not going to be any worse than it already is,” he said.
Another proponent of the building is Bob Biener, a former HARC member who has represented the owners of condominiums located above the current Clark’s Market.
“I think the building has evolved into something that fits in and looks good to me,” he said.
The problems came with a clash of egos and the board’s reaction against the perceived pressure placed on the board by town staff and elected officials to push application through, he said, adding, “There’s more involved to this than design. All in all, I don’t really feel like the mass and scale of the building would detract from the historical character of the town.
“I would have voted for it,” he said.
Lacking any other proposal to compare it to, Town Planner Mike Davenport said he expected the Clark’s project to eventually be approved by HARC since the grocery store is the best choice for the property.
“If something else would be proposed for there it would probably end up being some kind of a condominium project,” he said.
He said the lack of HARC approval doesn’t mean negotiations shouldn’t continue.
“We review the applications against the design guidelines, the land use code and the Master Plan,” he said. “(HARC’s position) is an important consideration, but it’s not the only thing we are considering.”
###
The controversial Clark’s Market expansion into a 48-foot high, 20,000 square foot grocery store with two additional floors for six units of employee housing and six new free-market condominiums, unable to past muster under the town’s architectural review guidelines, is being taken to a higher court.
However, an even higher court, local voters, may be waiting in the background.
Two council members – Stu Fraser and Andrea Benda -- have requested a “call up” of the Clark’s Market expansion after HARC denied the applicant’s request.
In a situation that’s just short of an institutional crisis over the town’s goal of preserving the historic architectural status of the town, the implication of an override of the decision made by the Telluride Historic Architectural Review Commission could inspire opponents of the project to pursue a referendum to defeat any possible reversal of HARC.
But first the three-year-old Clark’s Market saga must take a strange turn. The next episode will include a rarity: The Telluride Town Council will assume the role of HARC.
Rather than a review of the HARC decision to deny the project, largely over issues of “mass and scale,” the council will erase the blackboard on the 59,000 square foot building project, creating a virtual ‘do over.’
“They have taken jurisdiction of the Clark’s proposal,” Telluride Town Manager Frank Bell said. “It’s in their court now.”
He said the special session at 10 a.m. on Jan. 23 at Rebekkah Hall will provide the council with the options of either upholding the HARC decision, overturning the denial and approving the project outright, or, approving it and sending it back to HARC to work under new instructions.
The Town’s land use code allows the council to take such actions, he said.
However, only six of the council members will be able to vote in a case that requires a simple majority. That’s because Councilman Bob Saunders, who spoke as a local citizen against the proposal during the last HARC meeting prior to the denial, is recused from voting on the matter because he lives close to the project.
With Fraser, the council’s liaison to HARC, and Benda, who has spoken recently about reforming the entire HARC process, moving to keep the Clark’s application alive, the ball is in the hands of remaining members Mayor John Pryor, Councilwomen Roberta Peterson and Jill Masters, and, Councilman Mark Buchsieb. If there’s a 3-3 tie in any future vote, that will mean the project will remain unapproved.
All members of the council, including the recused Saunders, declined comment on the pending case, but many other players in the process are speaking out loud and clear.
“The reality is if HARC makes a decision and council overturns it, then what’s the point of having HARC?” asked HARC Chairman Chance Leoff, who also has been recused from the process because of his home’s proximity to the project.
He said if the HARC decision is reversed, then a ballot initiative may be launched.
“If we are going to stray this far from what’s normally allowed, then the public should have a chance to weigh in on what this is going to be,” he said. “The public is the highest court, isn’t it?”
Local architect Calvin Wilbourne, a former HARC chairman who also publicly spoke to the need to address the “mass and scale” issues during the architectural review hearing that led to a denial, said there is enough public sentiment against the project to get the signatures for a referendum.
“There are enough people around to do it right now,” he said of a potential voter initiative, adding that when the council meets Jan. 23 “that whole place will be full. It’s going to be very vocal. It’s a very active group (that’s opposed).”
Linda Levin, Town deputy clerk said the number of signatures equired to put it on the ballot is based on the percentage of registered voters in the last election. Typically, the town has a 1,000 or so voters, which means approximately XXX valid signatures would be needed for a successful initiative campaign.
However, another observer who has included his voice in the public process, Jonathan Augello, an architectural designer, believes both HARC and the architect for the Clark’s project, Dan Hunter, could have gone further to remove the impasse.
“It’s a conservative board with conservative rules, so it’s tough,” he said of HARC. “But they were real, real close. They could have just made it with just a little more effort.”
Augello said he was in favor of the visual impact of the building, especially considering the current state of the property with its large dirt-lot parking lot and odd sense of Victorian style and commercial utility.
“It’s not going to be any worse than it already is,” he said.
Another proponent of the building is Bob Biener, a former HARC member who has represented the owners of condominiums located above the current Clark’s Market.
“I think the building has evolved into something that fits in and looks good to me,” he said.
The problems came with a clash of egos and the board’s reaction against the perceived pressure placed on the board by town staff and elected officials to push application through, he said, adding, “There’s more involved to this than design. All in all, I don’t really feel like the mass and scale of the building would detract from the historical character of the town.
“I would have voted for it,” he said.
Lacking any other proposal to compare it to, Town Planner Mike Davenport said he expected the Clark’s project to eventually be approved by HARC since the grocery store is the best choice for the property.
“If something else would be proposed for there it would probably end up being some kind of a condominium project,” he said.
He said the lack of HARC approval doesn’t mean negotiations shouldn’t continue.
“We review the applications against the design guidelines, the land use code and the Master Plan,” he said. “(HARC’s position) is an important consideration, but it’s not the only thing we are considering.”
###
posted by Unknown at 10:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home