The demolition taskforce has a new proposal out for review. Insofar as preservation is concerned, the attached draft reflects a step forward, yet it still retains a rather fatal flaw.

Under this proposal, RNOs and related organizations will not be notified of a proposed demolition unless a city staff member decides that a home has historic merit. This determination may be made on the basis on just one photograph. Practice runs of this system have approved 90% of all demolitions without further review. Furthermore, "non-historic" certificates will be approved using the same process.

This flies in the face of existing practice. Whereas existing ordinances require that historic merit be based on a structure's historic, architectural, and geographic significance, the only characteristic reviewed here will be the structure's present condition. If it doesn't "look" historic, the structure can be destroyed.

There are certainly positive aspects to the proposed ordinance, such as a 21-day second stage for community members to research a property, a 120-protection for structures after they're nominated, and the removal of both the proposed "proactive survey" and its associated sunset provisions. But bureacratic approval of 90% of all demolitions by means of a single photo undercuts protection for those many historically significant homes unfortunate enough not to look pretty as a picture.

As quoted from the National Trust's Summer 2006 edition of the Mountain/Plains Preservation News...

"A recent speech by National Trust President Richard Moe put the national spotlight on the 'teardown trend,' a phenomenon that is affecting hundreds of neighborhoods and communities around the nation, including several in the Mountain/Plains region.

"'I believe teardowns represent the biggest threat to America's older neighborhoods since the heyday of urban renewal and interstate highway construction during the 1950s and 1960s,' said Moe during a June 28th speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. He noted several alarming examples from across the country, including the 78 percent increase in demolition permits issued in Denver between 2004 and 2005.

"Preservationists are responding to this crisis on many fronts. At the national level, the National Trust recently added a Teardowns Resource Guide to the website. Information includes 'An Advocate's Guide,' 'What's Wrong with Teardowns: A Visual Analysis,' 'Teardowns in the News' and a place to post information about your community's experiences. Additional sections are being developed and will be added in coming months.

"Efforts to address the teardown issue continue at the local level as well.

The demolition taskforce is making good progress.

The biggest realization gained in the August 24th meeting was that a historic survey would not resolve the demolition problem. While the plan for a survey may go forward, mediating problems with the demolition permitting process is once again the focus of taskforce deliberations.

Taskforce participants were generally in favor of notification broad constituencies, including the simple (and heretofore opposed) physical signage placed on the property itself.

The primary questions before the committee for their next meeting include:
1) When should notification happen (after some LPC "filter" or immediately)?
2) How long should the comment period last?
3) How should the proposed "non-historic" certification fit into this process?

In sum, the conversation today is worlds away from where it was 6 weeks ago. Historically-minded committee members must be thanked for getting this conversation back to the poblem at hand. There's may be a considerable distance to go before an ordinance will be presented, but the one that comes through will undoubtedly be better for historic homes and communities.

The next meeting is scheduled for September 28.

The city of Denver has two types of historical landmarks: individual landmarks and historic districts. Because of an error in the preservation ordinance, these two are differently protected. Whereas a structure in a historic district cannot be demolished without the review of the Denver Landmark Preservation Commission, individual landmarks can be destroyed just by waiting 12 months after the application for a demolition permit has been made.

This means that WWP structures such as the Mayan Theatre could be demolished at the whims of new owners without any public review.

The Blueprint Denver Committee has new language to remediate the problem, as will be discussed on August 23rd (City & County Building, Room 451, 1:30 pm). See the attached notification details for more information.

On August 7th, the Demolition Evaluation Task Force met again to discuss a new ordinance to match the needs of preservation with the desires for development.

The outcome was no new legislation, but the results were nevertheless promising. The historians in the discussion, especially West Washington Park residents Lisa Purdy and Malcolm Murray, raised some excellent points about the need for advance notice, public input, and removal of CPD control over the process.

Peter Parks remains adament about staff control over preliminary review. As discussed previously, this "filter" is designed to provide such a cursory review that more than 90% of the demolitions would be approved just by looking at a single photograph. He doesn't want demolitions to be posted because the city might receive calls with neighbor concerns.

The big push seems to be for a city survey of potentially historic properties. Discussion centered around Chicago's historic survey (which took 12 years, cost $1 million, and identified 17,000 properties), as well as a previous survey project in Denver and the ultimate costs. Yet Peter Parks pointed to the crux of the matter, which is that "a survey creates a false sense of certainty on both sides." WWP resident Lisa Purdy saw as well that the survey's proposed legal ramifications is what makes it so dangerous.