Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Heritage Commission approves Phase 1 cultural study, urges avoidance of Sinclair Wash Overlook site
Loading...
Summary
The Heritage Preservation Commission approved the Phase 1 cultural resource study for the Sanctuary subdivision after consultants identified six archaeological sites and recommended avoiding the Sinclair Wash Overlook (Sanctuary 4), which they found eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
The Flagstaff Heritage Preservation Commission voted to approve the Phase 1 cultural resource study for the Sanctuary subdivision, with a condition that additional mitigation be required if avoidance of the site identified as Sanctuary 4 proves impossible.
Ace Overman, anthropologist and GIS analyst for ETD Incorporated, told the commission the field survey identified six archaeological sites and 69 isolated occurrences in the 201‑acre project area. "Sanctuary 4, the Sinclair Wash Overlook site, is recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places," Overman said, and the report recommends avoiding the feature during construction because it likely contains intact subsurface cultural materials.
Commissioners pressed consultants on potential indirect effects from nearby housing, including distance and elevation changes between the proposed lots and the rock shelter. Ace Overman estimated the nearest houses would be “probably a good 600 feet” from the site and said the steep topography should minimize direct and indirect effects, though he acknowledged uncertainty without further fieldwork.
Lauren Clementino, the city’s heritage preservation officer, and other staff members said the recommended action before the commission was to approve the Phase 1 study while reserving the commission’s authority to require mitigation if project plans later propose development in the area currently shown as open space.
Commissioner (speaker 5) moved to approve the study with the stated condition; the motion was seconded and carried with no recorded opposition. The commission’s action requires proponents to return for additional review if project plans change and the previously preserved area is proposed for development.
The consultants advised that most of the identified sites and isolated occurrences consist of historic trash scatters and features associated with 20th‑century land uses, while Sanctuary 4 appears to be a prehistoric rock shelter with intact features worth avoiding. The commission requested clarified maps and a searchable appendix for the record and discussed monitoring and educational signage as possible non‑construction measures to reduce indirect impacts.
Next steps: project plans will proceed under city review; if federal permits or changes that might affect the eligible site emerge, staff and consultants said the commission should revisit mitigation and avoidance measures.
