Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landmark Designation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances Knights of Columbus landmark nomination despite parking‑lot dispute
Summary
The committee forwarded a landmark nomination for 1555 North Grant Street (Knights of Columbus District 539) to the full council after lengthy debate over whether the designation should include the adjoining parking lot; applicants said inclusion protects revenue and lowers assessed tax burden, while multiple council members warned of damaging precedent.
Denver — The Community Planning & Housing Committee voted Tuesday to send a landmark nomination for 1555 North Grant Street — owned by Knights of Columbus District 539 — to the full City Council, after a heated exchange about whether the application should include the site’s parking lot.
Cara Hahn, landmark planning and regulatory supervisor with Community Planning & Development, said staff and the Landmark Preservation Commission found the property meets four of the ordinance’s ten criteria, including historic association with the Knights of Columbus, mid‑century modern architectural significance and engineering innovation (the 1963 event hall’s early use of prestressed double‑T concrete).
Applicants from the Knights of Columbus told the committee that the adjacent parking lot is integral to the site’s history, was used in the post‑war era and currently generates revenue the organization uses to maintain the building. Sean Espie, a board member and applicant, said the lot generates about $120,000 in parking revenue annually and that, in conversations with the assessor, landmarking the lot would reduce the assessed value and the owner’s tax burden (applicants cited an estimated $90,000 annual tax impact).
Multiple council members strongly questioned including an actively used parking lot as a contributing historic feature. Several members warned that designating an empty or surface parking area as historic sets a precedent that could permanently limit future land use in a downtown area zoned for high‑density development. One member said, "I cannot say yes to a landmark preservation that designates a parking lot," and others noted landmark criteria are different from zoning or rezoning tools designed to limit development rights.
Applicants countered that losing the parking revenue would imperil the organization’s ability to maintain the hall and could trigger a demolition application; they urged the council to consider the designation as a means to preserve the building and the parcel together.
After discussion, the committee voted to forward the application to the full council. The committee recorded the roll call as presented in committee minutes and the nomination will proceed to first reading on the council floor.
What happens next: The nomination goes to the full council for consideration; if the council approves first reading, subsequent public notice and opportunities for comment or reconsideration follow.
