Commission approves storefront change at former P. Robbins building, requires a blank-wall treatment on Curtis Street

The Littleton Historical Preservation Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for changes to storefront openings at 2600 West Main Street (formerly the P. Robbins Building) and, after debate and a staff recommendation, substituted a requirement for an approved “blank wall treatment” in place of a staff-proposed mural condition.

Staff said the proposal responds to structural issues discovered during demolition: an interior staircase and compromised foundations on the Curtis Street side mean two previously proposed storefront openings cannot be created without risking structural failure. The applicant proposed a brick inset wall with an optional mural and to retain one historic door opening. Staff noted the building is eligible for a minor modification and that the proposed wall treatment would help the building meet standards for rhythm and visual interest under the Unified Land Use Code (ULUC).

Brett Murphy, the building owner, described surprise findings when demolition exposed the absence of brick behind a mansard roof and said contractors warned of a high likelihood of collapse if windows were opened at the problematic location. “We found out there is a secondary staircase that goes down on this side of the wall … the likelihood of a collapse on that wall was pretty high,” Murphy said.

The commission’s deliberations centered on whether a mural was appropriate in the historic district and whether the ULUC’s 15-foot blank-wall threshold should be strictly enforced. Several public commenters opposed a mural as inconsistent with the district’s historic character. Staff explained that the ULUC (adopted in 2008) requires treatments for blank façades longer than 15 feet and that the city’s code offers several acceptable options, including murals, decorative panels, landscaping trellises, or patterned brick. Staff proposed condition language requiring that any mural be painted (not physically embedded into the façade) and maintained; the commission amended the motion on the floor to replace the word “mural” with the broader “blank wall treatment” and approved the COA as amended.

The final motion, as amended, requires a note on the final plan set that the chosen blank-wall treatment cannot be physically incorporated in a way that would damage the building and that it be maintained with periodic cleaning, repair and repainting as needed. Staff said construction can proceed but the blank-wall treatment (or an approved variance) must be in place before issuance of the building’s first certificate of occupancy.

Motion and vote: The commission approved HPC Resolution 02-2025 as amended; the amendment to replace “mural” with “blank wall treatment” carried (4-1) and the main motion as amended carried (4-1).