Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Preservation commission questions Mini Street study, urges assessment of Slaterville historic district
Summary
At its Jan. 2 meeting, the Fairbanks Historic Preservation Commission questioned the DOT consultant’s Area of Potential Effect for Mini Street improvements and urged that the Slaterville neighborhood be assessed as a historic district before DOT finalizes a finding of no adverse effect.
The Special Historic Preservation Commission reviewed a Section 106 consultation letter from the State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities on proposed Mini Street improvements and raised objections to how the project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE) was drawn and how consultant reports judged historic integrity.
Staff presented DOT’s response to the commission’s prior letter and provided the consultant’s study, which staff said runs roughly 699 pages. Staff summarized DOT’s position that the planned work would not adversely affect historic properties within the project as currently defined.
Commissioner (Speaker 2) said problems remain with the consultant’s approach and with the APE boundary. “If your project affects a historic part of a historic district, it affects a historic district,” he said, arguing that omitting portions of Slaterville from the APE could improperly limit the analysis and that the APE should be redrawn or the commission should assume Slaterville is eligible for district status for the purposes of evaluating effects.
Speaker 2 also questioned the consultant’s conclusions on integrity for many older commercial and residential buildings, noting the determination that a property “has lost integrity” can be subjective. He cited a locally referenced building on Illinois Street that, despite alterations and a historic fire, is treated as contributing in another district and said that precedent suggests many Mini Street buildings may retain sufficient character to be contributing elements of a district.
Another participant (Speaker 4) pointed out what may be a typographical error in the property history for 215 Mini Street and noted local name variations for a former resident, which the commission asked staff to flag for correction in the record.
Commissioners agreed staff should tell DOT they want more information about the APE and a clear assessment of Slaterville as a district; one commissioner said he intends to prepare an individual response since DOT’s reply had been addressed to him personally. Staff said it will transmit the commission’s comments to DOT and direct DOT to the meeting recording so the agency can hear the concerns directly.
Next steps: staff will convey commissioners’ requests for a fuller APE justification and for the consideration of Slaterville as a historic district; one commissioner may submit a personal response. The commission did not take formal action beyond directing staff to forward comments.
