This document reviews how different municipalities define demolition in their local ordinances. It finds that definitions vary in terms of percentage of structure removed, treatment of primary vs secondary facades, and whether partial demolition is distinguished from full demolition. For example, Minneapolis defines demolition as removing 60% or more of a structure while Stillwater defines it as removing 50% of the facade or 20% of the front facade. The document also outlines demolition review processes in different cities.

1. Local Demolition Ordinances:
A National Comparison
Saint Paul Heritage Preservation Commission
Coordinated by: Amy Spong, Historic Preservation Specialist
Prepared by: Fred Counts, HPC Intern

2. What was reviewed?
Local Ordinances State Statutes & Rules
▫ Minneapolis, MN
▫ Stillwater, MN
▫ Milwaukee, WI
▫ Chicago, IL
▫ New York, NY
▫ Los Angeles, CA
▫ Winter Park, FL
▫ Minnesota
▫ Wisconsin
▫ Colorado

3. Ways to define demolition:
• Percentage calculation
▫ Do other municipalities use a
percentage threshold to
separate partial demolition
from full demolition?
The Aulick/Gavis House was the only intact
example of the Second Empire style remaining
in Winchester, Virginia. 30 years after a fire
damaged the home, necessary repairs had still
not been made, and the Winchester Common
Council voted to partially demolish the home
Images courtesy of the Winchester Star

4. Ways to define demolition:
• Principal vs.
Secondary
Elevations
▫ Are there cities that
define demolition by
façade?
Image courtesy of the Scottish Government

5. Minneapolis, Minnesota
• Chapter 599 of the Minneapolis
Code of Ordinances, Heritage
Preservation, defines demolition
as:
“The act of moving or razing a
building including the removal or
enclosure of sixty (60) percent or
more of the structure.” (Sec. 599.110)

6. Stillwater, Minnesota
• Chap. 34, Sec. 2 of Stillwater Code of Ordinances
states that Demolition of a historic resource
means any one of the following:
▫ Razing a building.
▫ Removal of 50 percent or more of the total facade.
▫ Removal of more than 20 percent of the exterior
front facade of a structure including the front
facing roof. The amount of front facade that is
required to be removed for a front porch shall not
be counted toward the 20 percent.
▫ Demolition by neglect.

7. Stillwater, Minnesota
• Chap. 34, Sec. 2 of Stillwater Code of Ordinances
states that Demolition of a historic resource
does not mean:
▫ Destruction by fire determined to be a total loss,
unless caused by arson.
▫ Destruction by a natural disaster or similar event.
▫ Items that are considered maintenance in the
opinion of the community development director.

8. Milwaukee, Wisconsin
• The Milwaukee Code of Ordinances does not
define demolition. The Milwaukee Historic
Preservation Commission has one definition for
demolition within its ordinance:
“Demolition" means the complete or partial
removal or destruction of any historic
structure or any structure located within a
historic district or site.” – Sec. 320-21.3.(c).

9. Milwaukee, Wisconsin
• Chapter 320, Section 21.2.(a) of the Milwaukee
City Code allows for Milwaukee HPC (in
concurrence with the Architectural Review
Board) to designate historic sites and districts
“solely for the regulation of demolition permits”.
• Partial or whole demolition, while not precisely
defined, is not allowed within a historic district
without a Certificate of Appropriateness granted
by the commission.

10. Chicago, Illinois
• A Chicago Landmark goes before the city council
when 40% or more of the total square footage is
proposed for demolition.
• The applicant must calculate the total square
footage of both the entire built space and the
amount to be demolished. This includes
accessory structures, such as garages, carriage
houses, etc.

11. Chicago, Illinois
• Chicago Municipal Code Section 13-32-230.(b).
▫ “…if a building or structure is color coded orange
or red in the Chicago Historic Resources Survey,
no demolition permit shall be issued for a period
not to exceed 90 days in order to enable the
department of planning and development to
explore options to preserve the building or
structure, including, but not limited to, possible
designation of the building or structure as a
Chicago landmark”

12. Chicago, Illinois
• Demolition-Delay Ordinance
▫ Adopted by the Chicago City Council in 2003, this
ordinance establishes a maximum 90 day hold on the
demolition of “certain historic buildings”, with
possible extensions to the 90-day period upon mutual
agreement with the applicant.
▫ This is in order for Planning & Development to explore
“appropriate” options for preservation, including
landmark designation.
▫ This ordinance applies to “red” & “orange” structures
within the Chicago Historic Resources Survey.

13. Chicago, Illinois
This 1889 Gothic Revival/
Richardsonian Romanesque
single-family home on South
Michigan Avenue, has been
on Chicago’s Demolition
Delay list since 2011. The
building is color coded
orange in the Chicago
Historic Resources Survey.
Courtesy gapersblock.com/demolished/

14. New York City
• Section BC 3302.1 of the New York City Building
Code defines both full and partial demolition:
▫ DEMOLITION, FULL: “The dismantling, razing, or
removal of all of a building or structure, including all
operations incidental thereto.”
▫ DEMOLITION, PARTIAL: “The dismantling,
razing, or removal of structural members, floors,
interior bearing walls, and/or exterior walls or
portions thereof, including all operations incidental
thereto.”

15. Los Angeles, California
• The Los Angeles Cultural
Heritage Commission has
the ability to prevent the
issuance of a demolition
permit for locally-
designated historic
landmarks for up to 180
days. City Council has the
authority to extend this hold
for an additional 180 days
should LACHC request it.
- Los Angeles Conservancy

16. Winter Park, Florida
“Because historic resources are irreplaceable
once lost, demolition review and control is
essential. It is the first line of protection for
significant buildings whether they are locally
designated or not.”
- Winter Park Preservation Ordinance
Comparison: 2013

17. Winter Park, Florida
• When Winter Park adopted a Historic
Preservation ordinance in 2001, the driving
force was for local designation in order to
protect historic resources.
• In 2013, the Winter Park Historic Preservation
Board acknowledged that the ordinance had
proven modestly successful in protecting some
properties, but historic resources were
continuing to be lost

18. Winter Park, Florida
• Winter Park’s Preservation Ordinance (Sec. 58-
434) defines demolition of a historic resource as:
“…an act or process that destroys or razes, in
whole or in part, a building structure or site,
including a building within a district, or which
permanently impairs its structural integrity.

19. Winter Park, Florida
• In Winter Park, the Historic Preservation Board
has the ability to review demolition of properties
if they are:
▫ Locally designated as an individual site
▫ Within a designated district
▫ May recommend for or against demolition of
FMSF (Florida Master Site File) properties, however no
process is codified so there is no effect.

20. State Statutes & Rules
• The State Statutes of Minnesota (7035.0805,
MN Administrative Rules) and Wisconsin (Wis.
66.0413) regulate demolition, but do not define
precisely what demolition means.
• The Code of Colorado mentions demolition as
part of its regulations, but does not define it. (CO
6 CCR 1007-2 Part 1 )