Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council designates 1801 Glendale Drive a local landmark, adds clauses acknowledging racially restrictive covenants
Summary
Council approved ordinance O-2025-1 to landmark the Tudor-Revival house at 1801 Glendale Drive, adding whereas clauses that explicitly note Glen Creighton's historic racially restrictive covenant (1923'1959) and urging public communications to reflect that history.
Lakewood City Council voted on Jan. 27 to designate 1801 Glendale Drive as a local landmark (Ordinance O-2025-1), approving a Historic Preservation Commission recommendation that the 1938 Tudor-Revival residence meets architectural- significance criteria. The commission's recommendation was based on criterion C (architectural merits), and commissioners voted 6-0 to forward the nomination, with the vice chair recusing from the decision.
Historical context required: The nomination and the public hearing prompted extensive public comment and council discussion about the Glen Creighton subdivision's history of racially restrictive covenants. Staff and the applicant's preparer, who previously worked at the State Historic Preservation Office, acknowledged the covenant existed in the subdivision's original plat from 1923 and was repealed in 1959; both Colorado's Fair Housing Act (1959) and the federal Fair Housing Act (1968) were cited as legal changes that ended the enforceability of such covenants.
Council amendment and rationale: In response to public commenters who urged the council not to "whitewash" that history, Councilor Lowe proposed two additional whereas clauses noting the Glen Creighton covenant and urging that any public commemoration transparently and solemnly reflect that legacy. The council adopted the amendment and then approved the landmark designation, with the roll-call vote recorded as 9-0.
Why it matters: Councilors and preservation professionals framed the action as consistent with typical historic-preservation practice: preserve a property for its architecture while also telling the fuller history of the place, including uncomfortable chapters. Councilors said plaques or public materials associated with the landmark should include explicit language about the racially restrictive covenant so the public record is complete.
Implementation: Landmark designation places the property on the city's local historic register; ordinary maintenance is allowed without extra approvals, but significant exterior changes or additions requiring building permits would require an alteration certificate reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. Tax credits for certain historic-rehabilitation work exist at the state level; councilors clarified that landmarking does not change local property-tax liability.
