Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 418 East Birch topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
HPC approves Phase 1 study for 418 E. Birch with conditions: calls second‑story a major impact, requires siding mitigation
Summary
The commission approved the Phase 1 cultural resource study for 418 East Birch Avenue but amended the staff-recommended language to characterize the proposed second‑story addition as a major impact and to require restoration or in‑kind replacement of original clapboard siding as mitigation; administrative sign‑off by staff was authorized.
The Flagstaff Heritage Preservation Commission voted May 21 to approve the phase 1 cultural resource study for 418 East Birch Avenue, attaching conditions that change the project’s impact classification and specifying mitigation. The commission authorized Heritage staff to administratively approve a revised study reflecting the changes.
Staff recommended accepting the study’s significance findings but asked the commission to treat the second‑story/addition as a “major impact” under city code and to list restoration or like‑for‑like replacement of the original clapboard siding as mitigation. “My recommended action…is to approve the significance finding outlined in the phase 1 culture resource study, and to accept a revised study identifying that the second story addition is a major impact under our code,” staff member Lauren told the commission.
Historic‑preservation commissioners discussed the project’s visual impact and the owners’ efforts to limit intrusion by using dormers and a half‑story configuration. Commissioner Duffy Westheimer moved the commission’s action: “I will move to approve the significance findings as outlined in the 418 East Birch Avenue phase 1 cultural resource study with the conditions of changes of using 1 and a half story as opposed to 2 story and identifying the source of the word town site for clarity,” she said; Commissioner Jesse Dominguez seconded the motion. The motion also instructed staff to administratively confirm the revised wording and to record that the siding restoration (salvage or replace in kind) is mitigation for the added height impact.
The motion passed on a voice vote with no opposed votes and one abstention. The approval covers only the study and the significance and impact findings; it does not itself authorize construction. Commissioners also asked that the study cite the source for the phrase “townsite” where used and incorporate minor language edits clarifying the half‑story description.
Why this matters: By classifying the addition as a major impact and specifying siding restoration as mitigation, the commission set the terms under which future permit or certificate reviews will evaluate the proposed rehabilitation and clarified the mitigation applicants must carry out to reduce adverse effects on the property’s historic character.
