A rendering of what the RedPeak apartment community would look like.
The city will not consider a request to provide historic status for a portion of the former Beth Eden Baptist Church that RedPeak Properties plans to raze to make way for a five-story, luxury apartment building.
A group called Friends of West Highland Landmarks attempted to have a portion of church building on Lowell Boulevard given historic status by the Landmark Preservation Commission.
RedPeak plans to incorporate the main part of the church into the community, but would raze a portion of the building that was added after the main church was built.
The portion of the building that RedPeak plans to demolish to make-way for a five-story apartment building received a “Certificate of Non-Historic Status,” in March 2008 from the city’s Landmark Preservation Commission.
“The Certificate of Non-Historic Status provides certainty in a demolition process,” Savannah Jameson, a senior city planner for Landmark Preservation in Denver’s Community Planning & Development told InsideRealEstateNews last Friday, in response to a request of the status of the Friends of West Highland Landmark’s request by InsideRealEstateNews.
“Non-historic status means the building does not meet the criteria for local designation,” Jameson said. She said that the non-historic status allows a demolition application to be processed “without further review by Landmark Preservation for a period of five years.”
That means the earliest the Landmark Preservation request would consider historic status for the structures, which would make them more difficult to demolish, would be on March 7, 2013, the five-year anniversary of the non-historic status, Jameson said.
RedPeak plans to start construction of three apartment buildings this year, possibly as early as spring. The other two sites are on Meade Street and West Moncrieff Place, just north of West 32nd Avenue.
This part of the Highland church building would be razed to make way for Red PeakProperties' luxury apartments.
Today, Jameson sent InsideRealEstateNews a copy of a letter that she sent to the group. The letter is below:
Friends of West Highland Landmarks,
Thank you for the designation application for 3241 Lowell Boulevard. After careful review of the application it was found to include properties that have been issued a Certificate of Non-historic Status.The Certificate was issued on March 7, 2008. Per Chapter 30 of the Revised Municipal code a designation can not be brought forward for a property that has been issued a Certificate of Non-historic status without owner consent.
Sec. 30-6(1)(c) Said certificate shall prevent an application for designation going forward without the owner’s consent for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance, and for said five (5) year period will allow an application for demolition to be processed without further review as to the structure’s potential designation.
The process for a Certificate of Non-historic Status includes research to determine whether the building has potential for landmark designation. If the building does not meet the criteria for designation the Certificate of Non-historic Status is issued. If the property has potential for designation then the property is posted for 21 days.
Again, thank you for your interest and please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
As the application cannot be processed therefore the application fee will be returned to you by mail early next week.
Savannah Jameson
Senior City Planner
Landmark Preservation
The Friends of West Highland Landmarks argued that “insufficient information” was considered in granting the non-historic status in 2008 and said that the required public notice was not given at that time.
“Our review of readily available public records provided a great deal more information bout these buildings than is contained in the application for non-historic status,” according to the group.
“Had this information been known, staff may not have concluded that some of the parcels had no historic significance,” it said in a letter to the Landmark Preservation Commission and to Tom Wootten, who headed an investment group that purchased the land in 2007 from Redeemer Temple. “These buildings are located in the heart of, and contribute significantly to the character of our neighborhood. We feel they should not be demolished without a more thorough review, and wanted you to be aware that we are taking this report.”
An official from the opposition to the new 147-unit apartment buildings did not immediately return a call. Officials from RedPeak Properties declined to comment.
Meanwhile, there has been some public confusion to what Wooten’s investment group paid for the parcel.
Earlier, Betty Luce, a real estate broker with Nostalgic Homes, posted a blog that said Wootten’s group had paid $6,563,800 for the three parcels on Lowell, Meade Street and West Moncrieff Place.
She said public records show that the three parcels total 53,680 square feet and the sale price equates to $122 per square foot.
However, the Denver assessor office records show the three sites have a total of 62,500 square feet. InsideRealEstateNews has obtained copies of the special warranty deeds for the purchase of the three parcels. The deeds, recorded on Oct. 22, 2007, show that Wootten’s group paid a total of $3.75 million for the land, which equates to $60 per square foot.
On a related matter, InsideRealEstateNews several weeks ago left a message with the Redeemer Temple church, which sold the parcels to Wooten, with four specific questions:
- Exactly how much money did it receive from the sale?
- Were the proceeds used solely for a replacement church building, or was some of the money used for programs or charity?
- What do church leaders think of the current neighborhood protests that claim the proposed buildings are too big for the area and would increase traffic, congestion and make parking even more difficult?
- Did the church ever contemplate changing the previous zoning of R-4 that allowed up to 75-foot tall buildings on each of the parcels and does it believe in retrospect that it made an error in not voluntarily downzoning the zoning that had been in place for decades?
A church spokeswoman responded that the officials from Redeemer Temple are “too busy” to address the questions.
When told that InsideRealEstateNews would be welcome an opportunity to talk about these issues when church officials were less hectic, she said would pass along that information. That was more than a week ago.
Contact John Rebchook at JRCHOOK@gmail.com
Bring in the ‘dozers.
I am very familiar with the portion of the building that was nominated. I attended church there for about 10 years until I was in my late teens and wished that the services could have been held in the more attractive older building. I thought back then, they should have torn down that building. It was too close to the street and lacked any attractive architectural detailing on the exterior. The interior, is quite the vanilla box. Nothing at all inside architecturally. I am now an architect and have some familiarity with the historic designation process. Regardless of my position on the current issue with Red Peak, my recollection was that it had no qualifications that would warrant it being historic. So, I’m pretty sure that it would not have been eligible regardless of the technicality that derailed the attempt described in your article. I suspect that is why in 2008, they determined that the building was of non-historic status. It just isn’t.
With this bunch (FOWL… gotta love the acronym) and NHWH, it seems like they’re always a day late and a dollar short. The nobody told me line has worn pretty thin.
Chook – quit dogging the church. Just like every other church in the city they are selling. Are your questions either going to 1) expose nefarious and scandalous plans by the church or 2) provide anything new to this discussion? I think not.
Drop it and just cover the facts that matter.
I agree with Dave…bring on the dozers and let’s get some apartments built!!!
those ready to “bring on the dozers”, please remember that this is not an abandoned church building sitting sad and empty creating some sort of eye sore. This Church holds a very active, and growing, congregation. Highlands Church is one of the first evangelical churches to thoroughly welcome the LGBTQ community. They were uprooted from a previous Church, but found hope, (and a home), in the old Redeemer Temple on Lowell. After only a couple years, (when they are growing and settled into a community), they are now being up-rooted again. This time moving to a room in a High School, why, because the Church building they were actively using is now seen by the City as a better fit for demolition and construction of a luxury apartment complex. Think what you want about the aesthetics of the church, but please be respectful and remember that a special place of worship is being taken away from an active, and one of a kind, congregation.
CJE-
That’s hardly fair, the City is not kicking the Highlands Church out of the Redeemer Temple. The landlord is opting to evict a tenant because they wish to re-purpose the property. The Highlands Church does not own the building, never has, and if they wish to establish more permanent roots in the community, they might want to consider finding a place of worship in a location where they can eventually own the property outright rather than being a tenant.
Paul by the City granting the non-historic status to that portion of the church (when if you’d read through the research and claim the FOWL are making, and not just what this blog states, you’d see that there is a real case for their claim. It should not have been granted based on the criteria and also the fact that there was never a public hearing) Also they very much would like to own the property. but an extremely high multi million dollar price tag is not one an up and coming church congregation can afford. unfortunately.
I have to agree with Paul. And CJE, speaking of sad and empty have you not walked by the building on Meade in the last year? It also seems disingenuous that opponents of the Red Peak project are suddenly (after failed attempts at downzoning, and historic landmarking),embracing this congregation. CJE may be spending his/her time and money contributing to the Highlands Church finding a new permanent home for themselves, and if so God bless…but I doubt NHWH will be holding a bake sale for them soon.
you shouldn’t lump/stereotype/ and project every opinion or comment that is made (by an individual) onto the NHWH group as a whole, or onto every possible person who might be an opponent of this project. Just because I personally made a comment merely asking for people to be respectful and understand that “bringing in the dozers” is a serious and upsetting event for the folks who worship there. It Doesn’t mean that all opponents of the Red Peak project are “suddenly embracing this congregation”. Your comment is rude and makes it seem like NHWH supporters are all jumping on some sort of bandwagon for the mere reason of protesting this project. I made the comment, and yes I’m embracing and giving a shout out to the church but I speak for myself and thats it. Don’t turn individuals thoughts, actions, and opinions into those of the entire group.
Cityboy not only do I walk by the building on Meade st Every Day, I also look out the front window of my house at it EVERY DAY. Its across the street from me. I live in the impact zone and believe it or not I’m not anti-development. and neither are any of my neighbors. I’d love to see that parcel developed. A 2 or 3 story mixed use building would be great. 2-3 story row houses or town-homes, also great. thats development we could all support and accept. But a 5 story Main Street building, densely packed with rental units, and being squeezed onto a residential side street, just flat out does not make sense. In order to make this building fit on this street they are actually cutting away portions of the curb just so it meets fire codes. Meade street was never intended to have 5 story buildings on it and thats how it should remain. I agree, the old bakery building is sitting there sad and empty , but there are SO many other options for it than a 5 story building that towers over the adjacent home and businesses and doesnt fit into the context and character of the neighborhood. Lets work to find a smart development for the area, not just any development.
John – what is going on with this project? No updates in a while….