Park Hill Landmark Designation: An Update
The character of Park Hill is slowly, in bits and pieces, being altered. Eventually we are at risk that our neighborhood will be altered to the point where it will no longer bear any resemblance to the place we love.
The old bungalows, cottages, Denver Squares, landscaping, privacy and views could be gone, replaced by big and bigger homes changing the skyline and diminishing the privacy of our neighbors.
Some of our neighbors feel that help is needed before it is too late.
The Historic Park Hill Committee’s preservation efforts are currently focused on the original platted area of Park Hill, between Colorado Blvd and Dahlia Street and Montview to 26th Ave. In total, it includes 700+ homes.
The committee’s purpose is to protect and preserve the unique character of Park Hill by ensuring that change occurs in a thoughtful and responsible manner. Fortunately the need for such protection was recognized as early as 1967, and those city neighborhoods that are designated as Landmark Historic Districts have received protection since then.
The guidelines have been established by the Landmark Preservation Commission of the City of Denver. When an area receives historic district designation they go into effect to guide construction and exterior alterations, but only for those that require a permit. The commission works with the owners and developers so that all development is responsible, and according to the numbers, enjoy a win–win for all.
For example in 2013, of the 399 applications that received formal design review, 398 were approved. Most – 325 of them – were administratively approved without the need for formal landmark commission review.
Thanks to these efforts, diverse neighborhoods such as Cole, Baker, Montclair, Wyman and Potter Highland – even the medians along 17th Avenue through Park Hill – enjoy protection from out-of-control development.
This protection is particularly important in our neighborhood, where the most at-risk homes are the smaller ones within the designated district. Their loss threatens the architectural, cultural and economic diversity of our area.
In the past months the committee has been busy. They have consulted with Historic Denver, the Staff of the Landmark Preservation Commission, and other Landmark Historical Districts to provide guidance in the procedure and held a town meeting to explain to Park Hill residents their aims and that process.
Members have received training in identifying the architectural characteristics that are to be preserved, as well as photographing all of the homes in the designated district. There have been four block parties in the area to answer questions regarding the designations’ impact on home values, restrictions and process.
As of this writing an outreach is underway where every home is being canvassed within the designated area to field questions and provide written information in the form of flyers.
If our neighborhood is left to the development of market forces, scrapes of smaller homes are sure to follow, larger and larger buildings will be built without regard to neighbors or to existing design form and scale. Ultimately the residents of Park Hill will decide the neighborhood’s fate, either by doing nothing or supporting the Landmark designation like so many other of Denver’s historic neighborhoods have done.
If you want to learn more you can find information at www.historicparkhill.org.
Neil Funsch has been a mortgage broker for 21 years, the last eight in Park Hill. He is a member of the Historic Park Hill Committee and can be reached at 303-229-2684 or neil.funsch@gmail.com.
May 4, 2016 @ 10:52 am
1. “The character of Park Hill is slowly, in bits and pieces, being altered.” Every neighborhood goes through this at different degrees and scales.
2. “Eventually we are at risk that our neighborhood will be altered to the point where it will no longer bear any resemblance to the place we love”. The market will never bear that many large homes to be scraped. Financially untenable now or in the future.
3. “This protection is particularly important in our neighborhood, where the most at-risk homes are the smaller ones within the designated district.” The number of small vs. large in the designated district is low enough that scraping all of them will not make the area “unrecognizeable”. see comment #2.
4. “….the most at-risk homes are the smaller ones within the designated district. Their loss threatens the architectural, cultural and economic diversity of our area.” This is a stretch. If this is truly a belief, then North park hill would be a more important area to protect. There is a far greater density of smaller homes, economic diversity, and “cultural” diversity (what is that as it relates to a small home?) farther north than the area you’re speaking of.
5. “scrapes of smaller homes are sure to follow, larger and larger buildings will be built without regard to neighbors or to existing design form and scale.” You’ve circled back and identified that only the smaller homes are at danger of being scraped, of which there are far fewer in your designation area than north park hill. Additionally, zoning regulations restricting setbacks, height, and form currently regulate what is possible on each lot, with QUITE A BIT of regard that our RNO suggested for the 2010 zoning. Lots of effort went into guiding the current zoning for our neighborhood, BY our neighborhood. Creating an additional layer of regulation is a terrible way to fix what you’ve missed.
I continue to strongly oppose this designation, and believe your efforts are terribly misguided towards the wrong area. Sweeping arguments of “losing the character of the neighborhood” are simply unfounded within the area being identified, in addition to making such statements as “…we are at risk that our neighborhood will be altered to the point where it will no longer bear any resemblance to the place we love.” The same could be said of the original residents. The ghosts of neighbors past would lament the loss of the horse drawn trolley, and the densification and overbuilding of every lot in the neighborhood as it currently exists. We also can’t forget these terrible newfangled cars! Parking on every street! Egads! where have all the horses gone?
Smaller homes will still be able to be scraped after this designation and new ones built according to current zoning! Unless somehow you can convince the city that all 700+ homes are contributing? Highly unlikely. I will vote a resounding NO when the moment arrives.
May 4, 2016 @ 1:27 pm
To put every design change up to a board is insane. People should be able to do with their property as they see fit, as long as it fits within building and zoning codes. Allow people to build according to the building zone codes. There is a democratic process of changing those. These are basic property rights.
I’m tired of NIMBYs limiting progress in the name of faux historic preservation. You can not legislate taste! It will be absurd that when people want to build an extra floor on their own house, they need to submit themselves to a board full of people that think that they know better. I’m sure they will all be architects and designers, right? Wrong – Maybe one at most? This is the ultimate example of NIMBYS getting in the way of people’s business.