DRAFT MINUTES
| HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 15, 2021 |
COUNCIL CHAMBERS 211 WEST ASPEN AVENUE 4:00 P.M. |
The meetings recording are available on the city's website
(https://www.flagstaff.az.gov/1461/Streaming-City-Council-Meetings)
1.
Call to Order
NOTICE OF OPTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice is hereby given to the members of the Heritage Preservation Commission and to the general public that, at this regular meeting, the Heritage Preservation Commission may vote to go into executive session, which will not be open to the public, for legal advice and discussion with the City’s attorneys for legal advice on any item listed on the following agenda, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3).
Chairman Hayward called the meeting to order at 4:11 p.m.
2.
Roll Call
| NOTE: One or more Commission Members may be in attendance telephonically or by other technological means. |
PRESENT:
David Hayward
Emily Dale
Jill Hough
Charles Webber
ABSENT-EXCUSED:
Caitlin Kelly
David Hayward
Emily Dale
Jill Hough
Charles Webber
ABSENT-EXCUSED:
Caitlin Kelly
3.
Public Comment
At this time, any member of the public may address the Commission on any subject within their jurisdiction that is not scheduled before the Commission on that day. Due to Open Meeting Laws, the Commission cannot discuss or act on items presented during this portion of the agenda. To address the Commission on an item that is on the agenda, please wait for the Chair to call for Public Comment at the time the item is heard.
At this time, any member of the public may address the Commission on any subject within their jurisdiction that is not scheduled before the Commission on that day. Due to Open Meeting Laws, the Commission cannot discuss or act on items presented during this portion of the agenda. To address the Commission on an item that is on the agenda, please wait for the Chair to call for Public Comment at the time the item is heard.
No public comment
4.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the Heritage Preservation Commission Regular Meeting held July 21, 2021.
Approve the minutes of the Heritage Preservation Commission Regular Meeting held July 21, 2021.
Moved by Emily Dale, seconded by Jill Hough to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission held on July 21, 2021.
Vote: 4 - 0 - Unanimously
5.
PUBLIC HEARING
A.
Monte Vista Hotel - Phase 3 Addition
Approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for Phase 3 improvements to an existing historic Monte Vista Hotel on the east of the hotel’s secondary facade. The review includes a street facing parking entry with a patio area over a portion of the parking. The project is located within the Downtown Overlay Zone.
Approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for Phase 3 of the Monte Vista Hotel Improvements with a condition that the Heritage Preservation Office be provided an acceptable paint chip with color and LRV specifications for the stucco of Phase 3 based on the feedback provided by the Heritage Preservation Commission.
The HPC has has reviewed the Master Plan and Phase 2 work on the Monte Vista Hotel
Address: 100 N San Francisco St
Assessor's Parcel Number: 101-19-005
Property Owner: Craven Enterprises LLC
Applicant: Karl Eberhard
City Staff: Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer
Assessor's Parcel Number: 101-19-005
Property Owner: Craven Enterprises LLC
Applicant: Karl Eberhard
City Staff: Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer
Approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for Phase 3 improvements to an existing historic Monte Vista Hotel on the east of the hotel’s secondary facade. The review includes a street facing parking entry with a patio area over a portion of the parking. The project is located within the Downtown Overlay Zone.
Approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for Phase 3 of the Monte Vista Hotel Improvements with a condition that the Heritage Preservation Office be provided an acceptable paint chip with color and LRV specifications for the stucco of Phase 3 based on the feedback provided by the Heritage Preservation Commission.
- The Commission could approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the submitted architectural package. This includes the HPO recommended adjustments of stucco colors and Light Reflective Value (LRV) that is a balance between Downtown Overlay design criteria and Flagstaff’s typical limitation that requires an LRV of 50% or less. The Commission should note the required findings in the HPO Staff Report and whether the situation in this case would be applicable to other similar properties in the district.
- The Commission could request modifications to the proposal and include them as conditions of approval – or –
- Continue the HPC review to a date certain and ask the applicant to come back with a modified proposal that meets those conditions.
The HPC has has reviewed the Master Plan and Phase 2 work on the Monte Vista Hotel
Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer gave a brief introduction to the project and application for a certificate of appropriateness for façade improvements at the Monte Vista Hotel.
Karl Eberhard gave a presentation outlining the proposed improvements to the Historic Monte Vista Hotel on the East of the hotel’s secondary façade. During the presentation, Karl emphasized that the stucco color was selected to better align with the traditional architectural character of the building.
Discussion after the presentation:
Emily Dale: Asked whether the proposed awning is going to be attached to the building.
Karl Eberhard: Confirmed and explained that the awning would be attached through grout joints and not through brick to ensure the building would not be damaged. Additionally, there will be a pass-through from the bar to the deck.
David Hayward: Asked Mark Reavis to clarify the downtown color standards from the handbook.
Mark Reavis: Gave clarification on color elements and facades from Downtown Flagstaff Design handbook. Specified that it states to reserve bright colors for accents only and where evidence demonstrates that the historical use of bright colors.
David Hayward: Asked whether the secretary of Interior standards suggest that additions to the historic structure should be compatible but distinguished from the historic construction.
Mark: Confirmed that is correct and added information from the Downtown Flagstaff Design handbook.
David Hayward: Asked whether the post office building is a sandstone color that is similar to the stucco color?
Mark Reavis: Confirmed the color is similar.
Karl Eberhard: Stated that he Showed the plan to the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and they were pleased with the project.
Mark Reavis: Clarified that the motion language is aligned with findings in the report that the submission has no adverse effect on the historic structure and neighboring properties and that it meets the Design Handbook and Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation.
Karl Eberhard gave a presentation outlining the proposed improvements to the Historic Monte Vista Hotel on the East of the hotel’s secondary façade. During the presentation, Karl emphasized that the stucco color was selected to better align with the traditional architectural character of the building.
Discussion after the presentation:
Emily Dale: Asked whether the proposed awning is going to be attached to the building.
Karl Eberhard: Confirmed and explained that the awning would be attached through grout joints and not through brick to ensure the building would not be damaged. Additionally, there will be a pass-through from the bar to the deck.
David Hayward: Asked Mark Reavis to clarify the downtown color standards from the handbook.
Mark Reavis: Gave clarification on color elements and facades from Downtown Flagstaff Design handbook. Specified that it states to reserve bright colors for accents only and where evidence demonstrates that the historical use of bright colors.
David Hayward: Asked whether the secretary of Interior standards suggest that additions to the historic structure should be compatible but distinguished from the historic construction.
Mark: Confirmed that is correct and added information from the Downtown Flagstaff Design handbook.
David Hayward: Asked whether the post office building is a sandstone color that is similar to the stucco color?
Mark Reavis: Confirmed the color is similar.
Karl Eberhard: Stated that he Showed the plan to the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, and they were pleased with the project.
Mark Reavis: Clarified that the motion language is aligned with findings in the report that the submission has no adverse effect on the historic structure and neighboring properties and that it meets the Design Handbook and Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation.
Moved by Jill Hough, seconded by David Hayward to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for Phase 3 of the Monte Vista Hotel Improvements with a condition that the Heritage Preservation Office be provided an acceptable paint chip with color and LRV specifications for the stucco of Phase 3 based on the feedback provided by the Heritage Preservation Commission.
Vote: 4 - 0 - Unanimously
B.
Teatro Restaurant Facade Rehabilitation - Herman Building
Certificate of Appropriateness: Design review for primary facade storefront rehabilitation per: Design Handbook for Downtown Flagstaff, Downtown Design Zoning Overlay.
Approve Certificate of Appropriateness
Address: 16 N San Francisco
Assessor's Parcel Number: 101-21-013A
Property Owner: Flagstaff Historic Properties
Applicant: Anne Mead Architect - Up Design
City Staff: Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer
Assessor's Parcel Number: 101-21-013A
Property Owner: Flagstaff Historic Properties
Applicant: Anne Mead Architect - Up Design
City Staff: Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer
Certificate of Appropriateness: Design review for primary facade storefront rehabilitation per: Design Handbook for Downtown Flagstaff, Downtown Design Zoning Overlay.
Approve Certificate of Appropriateness
Mark Reavis, Heritage Preservation Officer, gave a brief introduction to the project and application for a certificate of appropriateness for façade improvements at 16 N San Francisco.
Anne Mead, the architect, gave a presentation outlining the proposed facade improvements to 16 N San Francisco. During the presentation, Anne provided a brief history of the building.
Discussion after the presentation:
Jill Hough: Expressed concern about the flush/flatness of the façade. Noted that many other buildings on the street have a recessed doorway and do not have an awning. Asked why a recessed entry was not part of the design.
Anne Meade: Clarified that the recessed doorway has been discussed by the tenant, owner, and design team. Originally it was drawn it with a vestibule but that there are issues with homeless residents using them during non-business hours. Anne added that water infiltration issues were also a consideration and that the additional square footage on the inside is valuable to the restaurateur.
Jill Hough: Asked for David Hayward’s opinion.
David Hayward: Looked at street view, and also noted that most buildings have a vestibule. David clarified that although these served a purpose at one point, current use and needs should be considered as well. Finally, expressed that he doesn’t have strong feelings about it. Asked Mark Reavis if this had been discussed with Anne.
Mark: Clarified that yes, they had discussed a few different possibilities and went through iterations before the current design.
David Hayward: Asked Mark Reavis whether the improvements would be replacing an incompatible façade with a more suitable façade.
Mark Reavis: Confirmed that the design is returning the building to a more consistent façade.
Charles Webber: Asked Mark Reavis whether the design is filling in an empty façade to a more compatible façade.
Mark Reavis: Confirmed that is how he views it.
Jill Hough: Stated that it makes sense to have the door on one side or the other.
David Hayward: Asked if there was anyone present for public comment.
No comments were made.
Mark: Recommended motion on page four of the staff report.
Anne Mead, the architect, gave a presentation outlining the proposed facade improvements to 16 N San Francisco. During the presentation, Anne provided a brief history of the building.
Discussion after the presentation:
Jill Hough: Expressed concern about the flush/flatness of the façade. Noted that many other buildings on the street have a recessed doorway and do not have an awning. Asked why a recessed entry was not part of the design.
Anne Meade: Clarified that the recessed doorway has been discussed by the tenant, owner, and design team. Originally it was drawn it with a vestibule but that there are issues with homeless residents using them during non-business hours. Anne added that water infiltration issues were also a consideration and that the additional square footage on the inside is valuable to the restaurateur.
Jill Hough: Asked for David Hayward’s opinion.
David Hayward: Looked at street view, and also noted that most buildings have a vestibule. David clarified that although these served a purpose at one point, current use and needs should be considered as well. Finally, expressed that he doesn’t have strong feelings about it. Asked Mark Reavis if this had been discussed with Anne.
Mark: Clarified that yes, they had discussed a few different possibilities and went through iterations before the current design.
David Hayward: Asked Mark Reavis whether the improvements would be replacing an incompatible façade with a more suitable façade.
Mark Reavis: Confirmed that the design is returning the building to a more consistent façade.
Charles Webber: Asked Mark Reavis whether the design is filling in an empty façade to a more compatible façade.
Mark Reavis: Confirmed that is how he views it.
Jill Hough: Stated that it makes sense to have the door on one side or the other.
David Hayward: Asked if there was anyone present for public comment.
No comments were made.
Mark: Recommended motion on page four of the staff report.
Moved by Emily Dale, seconded by Charlie Webber to approve the façade design as submitted by the Architect that includes the plan set and documentation. Approve the sign design ensuring that the mounting does not impact the upper facades historic brick and is reversible.
Vote: 4 - 0 - Unanimously
6.
GENERAL BUSINESS
A.
Appointment of a Vice-Chair
Sara introduced the item and explained that since Jerry McLaughlin has stepped down the commission needs to appoint a Vice-Chair in case chairperson Hayward can’t make a meeting and to meet the requirements of the boards and commissions manual.
David Hayward: Volunteered Jill Hough for Vice-Chair position.
David Hayward: Volunteered Jill Hough for Vice-Chair position.
Moved by David Hayward, seconded by Charlie Webber to appoint commissioner Hough as Vice Chair
Vote: 4 - 0 - Unanimously
7.
REPORTS
Mark Reavis HPO noted to the commission with a short comment the following
Approvals: #1 * notes call out by HPO
Consultations: #2 * notes call out by HPO
Approvals: #1 * notes call out by HPO
Consultations: #2 * notes call out by HPO
A.
APPROVALS
This section shows the projects for which the Heritage Preservation Officer has completed a planning or building permit review, or approved a certificate of no effect or a letter report. Other departmental approvals may be needed before a project proceeds.
This section shows the projects for which the Heritage Preservation Officer has completed a planning or building permit review, or approved a certificate of no effect or a letter report. Other departmental approvals may be needed before a project proceeds.
1.
*Dark Sky Brewing Expansion (to adjacent building)
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00205 (HPC overlay) & CC21-02211 (sign permit)
Address: 103 W Birch
Type: Approval of Certificate of No Effect and Sign Permit
Date: 8/19/2021
Address: 103 W Birch
Type: Approval of Certificate of No Effect and Sign Permit
Date: 8/19/2021
2.
Ponderosa Parkway Condos
Permit Number(s): PZ-17-00227-11 Phase III
Address: 1650 E Ponderosa Parkway
Type: Approval of Final Plat
Date: 7/19/2021
Address: 1650 E Ponderosa Parkway
Type: Approval of Final Plat
Date: 7/19/2021
3.
Brews & Cues - Projecting Sign
Permit Number(s): CC-21-01727
Address: 11 S Beaver
Type: Approval of Sign Permit
Date: 7/21/2021
Address: 11 S Beaver
Type: Approval of Sign Permit
Date: 7/21/2021
4.
Odegaard -2 homes
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00186, PZ-21-00187
Address: Parcel # 112-10-015
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 7/21/2021
Address: Parcel # 112-10-015
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 7/21/2021
5.
WL Gore Dock Cover
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00188
Address: 4000 W Kiltie Ln
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 7/21/2021
Address: 4000 W Kiltie Ln
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 7/21/2021
6.
Canyon De Rio Final Block Plat and Blocks I and G Preliminary Plats
Permit Number(s): PZ-20-00088-03
Address: 32000 E Butler Ave
Type of: Approval of Final Plat
Date: 7/21/2021
Address: 32000 E Butler Ave
Type of: Approval of Final Plat
Date: 7/21/2021
7.
Shamrock Foods
Permit Number(s): PZ-20-00023-02
Address: 3615 E Industrial Dr
Type: Approval of Site Plan
Date: 8/2/2021
Address: 3615 E Industrial Dr
Type: Approval of Site Plan
Date: 8/2/2021
8.
West Street Single Family
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00198
Address: 1896 N West ST
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
Address: 1896 N West ST
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
9.
Mission Linen Entrance
Permit Number(s): PZ-20-00040-01
Address: 2450 E Huntington Dr
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
Address: 2450 E Huntington Dr
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
10.
Dunnam Sewer Extension
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00172-01
Address: 221 S Dunnam St
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
Address: 221 S Dunnam St
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/5/2021
11.
Warehouse improvement - Off of Butler
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00009-01
Address: 700 E Butler Ave
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/18/2021
Address: 700 E Butler Ave
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/18/2021
12.
Budget Inn Motel demo and replacement, Milton
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00207
Address: 913 S Milton Rd
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/18/2021
Address: 913 S Milton Rd
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/18/2021
13.
Manufactured Home Demolition
Permit Number(s): BP-21-02095
Address: 1450 W Kabab Ln
Type: Approval of Demolition Permit
Date: 8/18/2021
Address: 1450 W Kabab Ln
Type: Approval of Demolition Permit
Date: 8/18/2021
14.
Removal of non-historic facade components at 16 N San Francisco
Permit Number(s): BP-21-02071
Address:16 N San Francisco
Type: Approval of Demolition Permit
Date: 8/18/2021
Address:16 N San Francisco
Type: Approval of Demolition Permit
Date: 8/18/2021
15.
Canyon Del Rio
Permit Number(s): PZ-20-00089-03
Address: 3200 E Butler Ave
Type: Approval of Final Plat
Address: 3200 E Butler Ave
Type: Approval of Final Plat
16.
Dark Sky Brewing Sign Permit
Permit Number(s): CC-21-02211
Address: 103 W Birch
Type: Approval of Sign Permit
Date: 8/31/2021
Address: 103 W Birch
Type: Approval of Sign Permit
Date: 8/31/2021
17.
Carriage House - North End
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00212
Address: 413 N San Francisco
Type: Approval of Window Replacement
Date: 8/27/2021
Address: 413 N San Francisco
Type: Approval of Window Replacement
Date: 8/27/2021
18.
Ghost Tree
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00155-02
Address: 3201 S Clubhouse Cir
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/27/2021
Address: 3201 S Clubhouse Cir
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/27/2021
19.
Mountain View Apts
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00214
Address: 1965 E Mountain View Ave
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/27/2021
Address: 1965 E Mountain View Ave
Type: Approval of Concept Plan
Date: 8/27/2021
20.
Code compliace review ADU behind 313 N Kendrick
Permit Number(s): BP-21-01855
Address: 313 N Kendrick
Type: Approval of Building Permit
Date: 8/13/2021
Address: 313 N Kendrick
Type: Approval of Building Permit
Date: 8/13/2021
B.
CONSULTATIONS
1.
223 W Cherry - 2 units propose +1
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00183
Address: 223 W Cherry Ave
Type: Pre-application Meeting
Address: 223 W Cherry Ave
Type: Pre-application Meeting
2.
*Hicks Rooming House - new adjacent building proposal
Permit Number(s): PZ-21-00135-01
Address: 7 W Phoenix Ave
Type: HPO Compliance review
Address: 7 W Phoenix Ave
Type: HPO Compliance review
David Hayward: Noted that the project is being led by a family friend and indicated an intention to recuse himself from any Heritage Preservation Commission votes on the project.
3.
NAU Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility
Address: 1728 Kurtz Drive
Type: Section 106 comment
Type: Section 106 comment
4.
Cortland Lofts
Permit Number(s): PZ-18-00030-02
Address: 5531 E Cortland Blvd
Type: Site plan review - HPC awaiting final report & testing.
Address: 5531 E Cortland Blvd
Type: Site plan review - HPC awaiting final report & testing.
5.
Lake Mary Housing
Address: 4600 block of Lake Mary Rd
Type: Concept Plan Review
Type: Concept Plan Review
6.
FSL - Phase 1
Permit Number(s): PZ-19-00031-04
Address: 320 N Humphreys St
Type: HPO compliance review for addition photo documentation and salvage
Address: 320 N Humphreys St
Type: HPO compliance review for addition photo documentation and salvage
7.
Travel Inn - Historic Auto Lodge
Address: 1313 S. Milton Rd
Type: Consultation at site
Type: Consultation at site
8.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO/FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS
A.
Commission appointments
Sara Dechter, Comprehensive Planning Manager, discussed two vacancies on the Heritage Preservation Commission. Asked for help from commissioners in finding people to fill the two vacancies.
B.
Continuing virtual meetings
Sara Dechter, Comprehensive Planning Manager, discussed the City’s request that all Commissions remain virtual until Phase 4 of reopening.
9.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent by Chairman Hayward at 5:23 p.m.
| CERTIFICATE OF POSTING OF NOTICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing notice was duly posted at Flagstaff City Hall on , at a.m./p.m. This notice has been posted on the City's website and can be downloaded at www.flagstaff.az.gov. Dated this day of , 2021. __________________________________________ Sara Dechter, Comprehensive Planning Manager |