During its May 21 meeting, the City of Flagstaff鈥檚 Heritage Preservation Commission unanimously voted against accepting a cultural resource study on the building at 19 W. Birch Ave. ahead of its potential demolition.
Located directly to the west of the recent demolition of the buildings at 111 and 123 N. Leroux St., the building was constructed from 1950 to 1951 and previously functioned as Flagstaff City Hall, the fire department and police department among other municipal uses until 1980, when the departments began to move out of the building through the next two decades.
Jim O鈥機onnell and Capri Flagstaff LLC, which also owns the parcel for 123 N. Leroux St., is seeking to demolish the building to clear the land for the construction of the proposed Hilton Graduate Hotel and accompanying parking garage across the trio of parcels.
According to the study conducted by Cornerstone Environmental Consulting, which was contracted by Capri Flagstaff LLC, the building 鈥渋s not significant at a local level, does not retain integrity, and is not eligible for listing on local, state, or national registers including the National Register of Historic Places.鈥� As a result, Cornerstone recommended that 鈥渘o further historic preservation work be performed prior to demolition鈥� of the building and no mitigation is needed.
Though the city's requested action on the agenda item called for the approval of the Phase 1 Cultural Resource Study, all six members of the commission present for the meeting voted against accepting the report and requested revisions on two of the local criteria, specifically if the building is associated with significant events or people through history or if it embodies distinctive characteristics of the time period or the city. Seeking additional information on those aspects of the building鈥檚 history, the commission directed Cornerstone to look through multiple archives available through the City of Flagstaff or Northern Arizona University before returning for another presentation.
鈥淭hat used to be a city jail also. It used to be the city courts. 鈥� You never mentioned the courts that were upstairs. Also, the horn that was on top of that building that notified the volunteer fire department. You set your clock at noon by that horn,鈥� said commissioner Jesse Dominguez. 鈥淚 see that there鈥檚 some inconsistencies there. 鈥� There鈥檚 still a little bit more details that probably need to be written in your report.鈥�
In addition to Dominguez wanting to see additional information regarding the courts that were present in the building and the judges who oversaw those courts, Vice Chair Alycia Hayes said she disagreed with the findings of the building not being significant.
鈥淧articularly at the local level for Flagstaff in the Flagstaff criteria, it calls out political community buildings,鈥� Hayes said. 鈥淎lso for design, I don鈥檛 agree with some of your findings that it doesn鈥檛 have any integrity for design, materials, feelings or association (with history). I think it does have integrity of design. If I had lived here in 1951 and I walked by that building today, I would clearly recognize it.鈥�
Commissioners Duffie Westheimer, Abbey Buckham and Amy Horn echoed Hayes' stance on not agreeing with the findings of the report, believing the building to be significant.
However, while some of those beliefs were at least partially focused on the integrity of the building鈥檚 design, it was noted by both city staff and the preparers of the study with Cornerstone that the building鈥檚 specific significance is the 鈥渂igger thing to focus on鈥� through further research to evaluate the building鈥檚 historical context.
鈥淚t really comes down to more of the significance aspect and whether it actually qualifies under any of those criteria,鈥� said Jack Treichler, one of the two preparers of the study. 鈥淚 fully acknowledge that the integrity of design is still present in many ways, if only slightly diminished by some of the changes over time, but that鈥檚 very much a secondary aspect of what we鈥檙e looking at here.鈥�
As the discussion continued, with city staff suggesting to the commission that it detail specifics that should be included in a revision, Westheimer essentially pushed back on the idea that the commission was unable to simply disagree with the findings in the study.
鈥淲hat I think I heard you say is just because the people hired by the people who want to demolish the building make these claims, we can鈥檛 challenge them,鈥� Westheimer said. 鈥淚 mean, that鈥檚 a conflict of interest, and I think our role is to make sure that document is legitimate, and it鈥檚 not just something paid for by the person who wants to demolish the building.鈥�
A revised study is expected to be completed by late June and placed onto the agenda of the commission鈥檚 July meeting.
Should the demolition of the building at 19 W. Birch Ave. -- which is located within Flagstaff鈥檚 Downtown Historic Overlay Zone but outside of the Railroad Addition Historic District -- move forward, the Heritage Preservation Commission would also need to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness with the proposal subject to public hearings. As of the May 21 meeting, no development application for the hotel project had officially been submitted, and the project's concept plan was listed as "in review" according to the city's list of development engineering projects.