Landmark status denied for Hoyt House

JEFFERSON PARK — Late Monday night November 21, Denver City Council chose to deny landmark status to the historic boyhood home of brothers Burnham and Merrill Hoyt, two Denver architects whose combined works include Red Rocks, the State Capitol, the Denver Press Club and the Denver Library.

The 7-4 decision will lead to the owner, Judith Battista, receiving a certificate of non-historic status for 2849 W 23rd Avenue, which allows for the home to be demolished. The future buyers of her home and the home next to it required Battista to garner the certificate before the purchase, signaling that the 120-year-old historical site will soon succumb to the development boom that has reshaped Jefferson Park in the last few years.

Councilmen Rafael Espinoza, District 1, initiated the landmark process after Battista filed for the non-historic status and community members stepped forward to do it on their own. “Having experienced firsthand distortions of truth and justice as an applicant of a community-led landmark application and the personal toll that it had on my co-applicants, when I was contacted by the community about the desire to preserve the Hoyt House, I made the decision to act in my capacity to put forth the application,” said Espinoza. “Thus, allowing the structure to be considered on its merits with regard to the criteria and avoiding hostility being leveled on community members.”

Before the hearing, Battista stated that she was willing to sell the home to the highest bidder, whether that was preservationists or developers.

While Espinoza and Historic Denver Inc. found buyers interested in purchasing the home “as is” and developing it as a historic site, Battista acknowledged that she did not allow those potential buyers inside to see the home.

Battista, who has owned the home for nearly10 years and is currently renting the property to tenants, told Council: “This hostile designation has been anything but kind to me. I cannot afford the repairs or the upkeep. My house is my only investment and my only nest egg for retirement.”

During the hearing, Espinoza said that if the home were Landmarked he would help find Battista a buyer for the property, but he questioned why it should be the responsibility of the seller to obtain the right to demolish the home instead of the purchaser who stood to profit from its development.

Throughout the hearing Council members stated time and again that the home had historic value that should be preserved, but were concerned about the loss of wealth Battista might experience as a result of their following the recommendation of the City’s Landmark Preservation Commission, which voted unanimously to save the Hoyt house.

Additionally, members stated that they were concerned that the process needed to be tweaked to raise the bar against historic preservation and for homeowners seeking the right to demolish their homes either for themselves or others.

Council member Mary Beth Susman stated the ordinance may “need some tweaking and maybe a higher bar for hostile designation [than is needed in cases where the owners are amenable to the designation]”

Espinoza disagreed with the assertion that the bar was too low or that the Landmark designations were becoming a new norm.

“Since I have been in office, there have been 197 of these requests for the right to demolish a potential landmark structure. Of the 197, 86, nearly half, have been in my northwest Denver district,” said Espinoza. “Of the 86, I have had come through; seven structures have had the potential to be wider-scale points of contention among my constituents. Only one resulted in a land-marking application that resulted in this sort of public hearing, and that structure is now demolished. The other six potentially historic structures that generated community concern resulted in the following outcomes: Three were withdrawn voluntarily, and the structures remain. Two were protected from demolition and destructive alteration via a covenant agreement with Historic Denver. One was voluntarily withdrawn, and a full restoration is almost complete, and will be resold along with new developments on both sides of the structure.”

The ability to challenge an owner’s request to acquire a certificate of non-historic status to demolish a home required only one applicant and $ 100 before 2012. In 2012, Council amended the ordinance by increasing the fee to $ 875 and requiring three signatures from Denver residents. However, Council recognized that a community could not always raise those fees and allowed a Councilperson to make the challenge.

Council members voting for the landmark designation were Espinoza, Wayne New, Debbie Ortega and Paul Lopez. Those opposed were Kendra Black, Albus Brooks, Jolon Clark, Kevin Flynn, Mary Beth Susman and Stacie Gilmore.

By: Joe Boven  |  [email protected]

The post Landmark status denied for Hoyt House appeared first on North Denver Tribune.

North Denver Tribune

Abuse Of Denver Landmark Historic Certification

As landscape architect Saco Rienk DeBoer (DeBoer SR) work can be experienced in a number of city parks and numerous private gardens throughout the city and West. As a planner, who co-wrote the zoning code for the first time in Denver, designed many of his ways, and led to the development of the mountain parks. The people of Denver are fortunate to have the opportunity to visit many parks (including botanical gardens), where you can discover the work of SR DeBoer. These parks include, but are not limited to, the Denver Botanic Gardens, Red Rocks Amphitheatre, City Park, Washington Park and sunken gardens.

Therefore, the family believes that this should be enough for the people of Denver, and that private ownership of the family must participate through malicious use of the designation of the SR DeBoer Historic simply because there was so much. For that reason alone, the family wonders why the city of Denver wants to help “neighbors” essentially a “taking” of the past legacy SR DeBoer left his family? SR DeBoer make many parks helped design to beautify the city does not?

It took 33 years since his disappearance. Meanwhile, the “neighbors” of the property should not talk about your feelings with family s. SR DeBoer “In fact, the daughter of SR DeBoer itself has been overwhelmed by the heavy amount of maintaining the property and in recent years has sold pieces of the people trying to” take “the rest of the ownership of the family. There was until (Elizabeth Wright) of his daughter in July 2005 and progress towards the sale of goods for their other children, not the “neighbors” tried to describe this historic property. Therefore, that act as called “hero” for his legacy in his own family is clearly an obvious attempt to use their memory and minimize the history of his own family on the property (86 years) for obvious selfish gains.

Lafon and neighbors who signed the petition for historic designation have no direct experience with SR DeBoer DeBoer’s family does. SR DeBoer family personally experienced what happened in the property and ultimately will know their property. SR DeBoer died in 1974 and none in the area and knew him personally.

Currently, the Denver Historical Society, and the neighboring properties in East Iliff Avenue Denver, looking to appoint an historic district, which includes a number of surrounding property. Leigh and Mark Lafon came to the historic designation of the request without the consent or knowledge of the SR DeBoer family, and received the signatures of the members of the neighborhood.

Leigh Lafon specifically wrote a letter to the Landmark Commission asking that the process is “fast” and must be kept secret from the family of SR DeBoer. The city of Denver employees according to their application on the basis of their concern for the alleged impending demolition of the buildings on the property. There has never been a demolition permit from one of the three buildings on the property and the family of SR DeBoer SR DeBoer was never notified of the initial hearing with the reference point of the Commission. Employees of Landmark Preservation Commission could have easily found that no demolition permit obtained, but chose not to. There is no doubt that the false accusation of demolition Lafon artificial sense of power alarm raised in the neighborhood.

The first (of 4 in all tests due to corrections made on the basis of refutations of SR DeBoer family) request was a 45-page document that contains false statements and numerous historical errors. Leigh and Mark Lafon has had many opportunities to meet the historical commission and organizations in other cities to make their points, while the SR DeBoer family has had virtually no opportunity to do so.

Ana Novas, who lives on the farm property adjacent to SR DeBoer DeBoer and true home of RS in his life, was initially interested in selling your property with the SR DeBoer family, and even provided the name of a developer. However, later signed the petition of the neighbors later. Neighbors SR DeBoer property, including Lafon, refer to this center as their “forest”, “enclave Woody” and “his sanctuary” and have benefited from the efforts of the SR DeBoer family to retain ownership of forest. Due to financial problems and the transition from Elizabeth Wright (SR DeBoer daughter) their children were forced to put the property up for sale. Without direct knowledge and development for fear that the neighbors have chosen not to broach the subject with the family, but to look slyly historic designation of the family could not do anything with the property.

Sell your house fast for cash. We Buy Houses Denver. Visit

Find More Denver Articles