Loading...
2004 05 20 HPC Minutes MINUTES . HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Ouinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Ouinta, CA May 20, 2004 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commi~sion was called to order by Chairperson Leslie Mouriquand at 3:03 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance. B. Roll Call. Present: Commissioners Puente, Sharp, Wilbur, and Chairperson Mouriquand Absent: It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente and Wilbur to excuse Commissioner Wright. Unanimously approved. Staff Present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Martin Magana, and Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente and Wilbur to approve minutes of the April 22, 2004, Historic Preservation Commission as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report for Tentative Tract Map 32072 Applicant: RJT Homes Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH Location: Southeast corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 P:\CAROL YN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 5-20-04.doc Last printed 7/16/04 9:20 AM Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the infarmation cantained in the staff repart, a capy 'Of which is an file in the Cammunity Develapment Department. 2. Cammissianer Wilbur cammented an the firsf canditian regarding earth-maving and grading. He asked if that meant the relacatian 'Of a large quantity 'Of .earth. Staff replied the canditian refers ta any type 'Of earth maving 'Or clearing 'Of vegetatian, and trenching. 3. Cammissianer Sharp cammented the Cammissian was aware this is a sensitive area and was in favar 'Of an archaealagist' manit'Oring the site. 4. C'Ommissianer Puente and Chairpersan M'Ouriquand agreed with staff's recammendatians. 5. It was maved and secanded by Cammissianers Puente and Sharp t'O adapt Minute M'Otian 2004-007 accepting the Paleantalagical Resaurces Assessment Repart far Tentative Tract Map 32072, Assess'Ors Parcel Numbers 772-410-021 and 022, in the City 'Of La Quinta, Riverside Caunty, Califarnia, subject ta canditians. Unanimausly appraved. B. Archaealagical and Pale'Ontalagical Survey Rep'Ort an Tract 31852 Applicant: Ehline Campany Archae'Olagical Cansultant: L & L Enviranmental, Inc. Lacatian: Narthwest carner 'Of Madisan Street and Avenue 52 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented cantained in the staff repart, a capy 'Of which Cammunity Develapment Department. the infarmatian is an file in the 2. Cammissianer Sharp asked what a lacustrine adaptatian was. Chairpersan M'Ouriquand replied it referred ta a lake enviranment. Cammissianer Sharp said he thaught this was a very interesting repart, full 'Of histary and cultural backgraund. 2 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 3. Commissioner Puente asked who appointed the archaeological monitor. Chairperson Mouriquand replied the applicant is required to contract with someone who is on the County List for professional monitoring. When tribal monitoring is required, the tribe appoints someone who is qualified. Staff added the applicant has to provide the City with evidence of the monitor's qualifications. 4. Commissioner Puente commented on the amount of artifacts collected and wanted to know where they were being stored. Staff replied artifact storage was an item that needed to be. discussed. New laws are now in effect regarding how cities can collect and store resources. There will have to be discussion on whether the artifacts can be stored locally. 5. Commissioner Wilbur asked if there was any response from the Native Americans. Staff replied they contacted the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians and the Native American Heritage Commission. They received no comments back. 6. Chairperson Mouriquand commented on the fact. that Archeological and Paleontological Resources Reports require two different disciplines with different criteria. When they are combined in one report, it becomes difficult to read and can create a problem if something of significance is found requiring detailed discussion. She had additional comments on the archaeology portion but chose to include them in the upcoming conference call with the archaeologist. She added the report needed to relate the history, activities, and the project site in order to determine the significance and eligibility for both the State and National Registers. She found the report lacking and incomplete. 7. Project Archaeologist, Kristie R. Blevins, was unable to attend the meeting and was introduced, via a conference call, to answer any questions the Commissioners had. 3 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 8. Chairperson Mouriquand asked Ms. Blevins about her comments on past ranching and agricultural activities and how she had arrived at her conclusions. Ms. Blevins replied there were remnants of what appeared to be ranching activities, including a cactus garden and various animal pens. Chairperson Mouriquand asked Ms. Blevins \l\(hat these things dated to. Ms. Blevins replied they are modern. 9. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if a records search had been done, through the General Land Office (GLO), searching for homesteading and other ~ypes of land granting activities on the property. Ms. Blevins replied it had not. She did the records search through the historical map and properties available at the Eastern Information Center. 10. Chairperson Mouriquand said she did not find any general contextual discussion on the local history in the report and the 'whole historic period was not considered in the report. Ms. Blevins replied they focused more on the prehistoric period ,because of the prehistoric pottery found on the property. Chairperson Mouriquand commented this was supposed to be a Cultural Resources Investigation and should have included not only the prehistory, but the historic period. Ms. Blevins replied that was correct. 11. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if the Torres Martinez or Augustine Band of Indians had been contacted as part of the project scoping and consultation effort. Ms. Blevins replied she thought a letter had been sent to the Cahuilla Band. Chairperson Mouriquand said the Cahuilla Band is located in the Anza Valley and a Scoping Letter should have gone to the Cabazon Band. Ms. Blevins replied she was not familiar with this part of the report. She believed her associates had made contact with Rob Wood of the Native American Heritage Commission to find out who and where to make contact. She didn't personally speak to Rob Wood so she didn't know what went on with that particular conversation, but could find out. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if they sent a request to the Native American Heritage Commission for a sacred land search. Ms. Blevins replied she thought it was done over the phone and not in a formal letter. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested she 4 Historic Preservation Commission ' May 20, 2004 might want to put it in writing to the Native American Heritage Commission. They could then respond, in writing, with comments and an attached list identifying the appropriate Bands to consult. 12. Chairperson, Mouriquand stated the Commission needed to have the RPA (Registered Professional Archaeologist) sign and certify the report, Ms. Blevins replied the signatory, Leslie Nay Irish, is the Principal. Chairperson Mouriquand stated Ms. Irish was not a qualified Archaeologist, according to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. The report has to be signed by somebody who is duly qualified to certify these kinds of reports, as well as certification by the Paleontologist. Ms. Blevins replied it would be done. 13. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested the report be handed back ,to the Consultant for completion and correction and resubmitted for review at the next Commission meeting. Ms. Blevins was told staff would be sending a letter, with comments, on the reports for her revision. 14. Staff restated the following items needed to be addressed: a) A General Land Office records search for any homesteaded properties. b) Discussion of local history and the historic and prehistoric period context. c) Discussion of the local archaeology and how the site relates to it. d) Correct the Native American reference from the Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians to the Cabazon Band. Provide Scoping Letters to the Cabazon, Torres Martinez and Augustine Indian Bands. Provide written responses and include in Appendix. 5 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 e) There was mention of a prickly pear cactus garden, aRd discussion of how the past activities on the prop,erty were associated with ranching and agriculture. Provide clarification of the nature of the ranching, or the agriculture, and whether they were historic activities. . f) There were generalized discussions on the different paleontology, Indian sections, archaeology, but the conclusions were not complete on identification and how the project relates to the site area. g) Supply source references of historical maps used. h) All reports listed on the reference list. 15. Ms. Blevins asked how soon they could expect the comments back. Staff replied as soon as the minutes could be done they would transmit the letter with general comments, and suggestions including the excerpts from the minutes. 16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilbur and Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2004-008 to return the Phase I Archaeological and Paleontological Survey Report on Tract 31852 to L & L Environmental for completion, with revisions as stated above, for the Commission's review at a future meeting. Unanimously approved. C. Phase I Archaeolo(lical Survey Report for Tentative Tract Map 31087 Applicant: Tahiti Partners Archaeological Consultant: L & L Environmental, Inc. Location: South side of Darby Road, east of Washington Street 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Sharp commented this was a heavily developed area. 6 Historic Preservat;'on Commission May 20, 2004 3. Commissioner Puente asked when a Phase II was required. Chairperson Mouriquand explained the Phase II was required when there was something found requiring additional efforts to determine its significance. Also, when the moh'l'tor has evidence there may be subsurface artifacts. Subsurface testing may be needed to decide how to craft the mitigation or preservation treatment. 4. Commissioner Puente said in one of the recommendations mentioned under 5.3. H Archaeology Recommendations (1), Page 16 of the report, there was a request to develop a mitigation plan. Did this mean the archaeologist was anticipating they would be likely to find something? 5. Chairperson Mouriquand replied that was standard language ,used in the industry. This phrasing allows for justification of monitoring if something is found. If monitoring is recommended, the monitor works with the client and their . grading schedule to design an appropriate level of mitigation and mpnitoring. Some projects don't warrant a full-time monitor. Sometimes the focus is in a certain area. Sometimes you do spot checks to customize the monitoring program to fit the needs of the project. That would be what they were discussing in this report. Staff replied that was right. Ms. Mouriquand added this project would require a lower level of monitoring effort than required for a village site. 6. Commissioner Wilbur commented the surrounding area seems to have some considerable sites and it would be particularly unique if this site had nothing. 7. Chairperson Mouriquand replied from all the past research, and surveys in that area, it is a highly sensitive area. The parcel may be surrounded by development, but that does not mean there might not be something subsurface on the property. She concurred that monitoring would be appropriate even though nothing was found at the Phase I level. You have to consider what the probability is of something being found on the site. 7 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 8. Chairperson Mouriquand made the following comments to Report Archaeologist, Ms. Kristie Blevins: ' , a) A General Land Office (GLO) records search needed. to be done for any homestead or land grant historic activities on the property. b) A discussion was needed of the local history as part of the cultural resources investigation procedure. c) Scoping letters to the Cabazon, Torres Martinez and Augustine Indian Bands should be provided. d) There were references to past ranching and agricultural activities. An explanation should be provided of what evidence was on the property for consideration of past ranching and agricultural activities. 9. Chairperson Mouriquand asked about the report comment saying most of the study area had been developed. Was this referring to the radius or the project itself? Ms. Blevins replied it referred to the radius. 10. Chairperson Mouriquand continued the Cultural Context discussion on the Paleo-Indian Period, the Archaic Period, and the Late Prehistoric Period needed to be more relevant ,to .the local area, to create the local, cultural context. The Late Prehistoric discussion was very short. It referenced the Luiseno, and the generalized San Luis Rey complex, but it didn't discuss Cahuilla, late prehistory archaeology and culture at all. It didn't discuss prehistory at all or tie it into the Cahuilla or local tribes. There was mention of Luiseno and San Luis complex, which is considered regional, but there is no discussion of the local area. 11. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if there was a source of references for the historical maps. Ms. Blevins replied the historic maps would have been from the Eastern Information Center (EIC). 12. Chairperson Mouriquand said there was discussion about Federal Laws. Was this because there was Federal involvement in this project, or is this a CEQA project. Staff replied this was a CEQA project. 8 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 " 13. Chairperson Mouriquand had some additional comments centered on the historic period and explanation of the ranching that was identified as being associated with the parcel.' She suggested, rather than going over each item, staff could provide Ms. Blevins with a commentary to assist her in revising the report. Ms. Blevins replied that would be very helpful. 14. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp ,and Puente to adopt Minute Motion 2004-009 to return the Phase I Archaeology Survey Report for Tentative Tract Map 31087, to L & L Environmental for completion, with revisions as stated: above, for the Commission for review at a future meeting. Unanimously approved. D. Interim Phase II Cultural Archaeolo~ical Test Pro~ram .for Tentati.ve Tract Map 32201 Applicant: Choice Enterprise Archaeological Consultant: Archaeological Advisory Group Location: Northwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 60 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented contained in the staff report, a copy of which Community Development Department. the informat,ion is on file in the 2. Commissioner Sharp asked if the tamarisks had been taken out. The applicant's representative, Dave Saccullo, 74-923 Highw.ay 111, Suite 114, Indian Wells, California, introduced himself and replied the tamarisks had not been taken out. He had been notified he needed a Paleontology Report which was currently being done by Mike Hogan of CRM TECH, and should be available by June 1, 2004. Mr. Saccullo asked if he had the Paleontologist submit a letter verifying there have been no relevant sites at this location could he go ahead with clearing and grubbing. Staff indicated that the client's position as long as the Paleontological Report and monitoring were done it would be acceptable. They would need to check to make certain that the person doing the monitoring was qualified. Dave Saccullo said Mike Hogan's firm would be doing the Archaeology and Paleontology monitoring. 9 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 3. Chairperson Mouriquand commented he would probably have Harry Quinn doing the monitoring as Mr. Hogan was not a qualified Paleontologist. 4. Commissioner Wilbur asked what the protocol was for Interim Phase II reports from staff's experience. Staff" replied they have been submitted in the past and accepted. In this case, since the results did not reveal artifacts they would be comfortable accepting the Interim Report. If anything is found, or the status changes, it would be brought back to the Commission. 5. Commissioner Sharp was concerned about what would be found under the tamarisks, but was happy the project would be monitored. Mr. Saccullo said they would have a monitor and . contact the proper tribal entities as necessary. 6. Chairperson Mouriquand had no further comments and agreed . with staff's recommendations. 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente and Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2004-010 accepting the Interim Phase II Archaeological Test Program for Tentative Tract No. 32201, as prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group, subject to conditions. Unanimously approved. E. A Cultural Resources Investigation of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area .(Tentative Tract Map 31348) Applicant: Madison Development Archaeological Consultant: McKenna, et al Location: 46-201 Washington Street (located on the west side of Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111) 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairperson Mouriquand stated the report is a nice contribution to the history of La Quinta. 10 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 3. Archaeological Consultant Jeanette A. McKenna was present and pointed out the photo on the cover of the report was that of Mrs. Louise Neeley. 4. Commissioner Wilbur said he knew this report'"would go to the Library and Historic Museum, but- he suggested a copy be given to each of the City Council members to demonstrate what can be done. Chairperson Mouriquand commented there was a large expense attached to producing reports this detailed. She suggested one copy be presented at a Council meeting to let them know it would be .fiIed in the Community Development Department for their review. Staff replied there was protocol on how the Council was informed of certain matters. They are included in a weekly update. Chairperson Mouriquand agreed it would save printing expenses and would be a more efficient way to notify the Council. 5. Commissioner Sharp thanked the Archaeologist for such a nice scholarly piece of work. He thought the work was so well done a copy should go to the Chamber of Commerce and the La Quinta Hotel. It was a historical document and should be shared. Chairperson Mouriquand said a copy should be put in the Library. 6. - Ms. McKenna said the Historical Society might be able to use this report, possibly as a fund raiser. She added, one of her employees was in graduate school and would be using portions of this report in her thesis. Commissioner Sharp asked if the Commission would be able to obtain copies of that report. Ms. McKenna replied it would be possible. She clarified the research was being done on Mrs. Neeley's family and their impact on the history of the Valley. She said their family history was very amazing the more you looked into it. She said you're very impressed when you read the transcripts, hear her speak about her parents, her grandparents, where they came from, what they did, how they got here, and how quickly they came from living in tents, to a generation later, all being college graduates. 11 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 7. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested Council be informed the report will become part of a thesis. The message to Co~ncil should be there is academic value in doing these kinds of investigations rather than just to obtain building permits and entitlements for projects. Efforts of this nature c:an lead to valuable contributions to local history and academic study. The City should be proud of, and encourage more of this activity and possibly look into promoting a scholarship fund. It's too bad there isn't a copy of the 1997 Revisions to the Draft Context Statement because a lot of those things have been addressed and cleaned up and I think the archaeologists are using the 1996 version. However, this is an outstanding effort, and a lot of work went into this. She thanked Ms. McKenna and her staff. 8. Ms. McKenna said a copy of the video was given to staff, but she has the original, if additional copies needed to be made. She also commented it was amazing the information that could be obtained when the General Land Office and the County 'records were used. 9. Commissioner Sharp commented there had previously been a movement in the area, about a City of La Guinta Pageant. He said he could see a Pageant being produced from this historical information. 10. Chairperson Mouriquand asked the Commission to recall the reason this report was commissioned. The previous reports did not go far enough, and the Commission requested a more detailed effort be done. That was accomplished in this document. She asked if the Commission and staff felt this property had been adequately documented. Staff replied there had been two efforts. One was to document all that was possible, including Mrs. Neeley's information, and the other was to consider the possibility of inclusion in the Register. Chairperson Mouriquand asked for Ms. McKenna's recommendations as to where the Commission needed to go next. 12 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 11. Ms. McKenna replied monitoring would have to continue cH)d commented on the following process to nominate a site for the State Register. The Ranch meets the minimum requirements of criteria 1, 2 and the potential for 4. Criteria 3 was discounted which was the architecture, because of the deterioration of the buildings, the addition of things that had nothing to do with Point Happy and the significant removal of elements to Point Happy to where you had such a small fraction left it was really hard to say it was representative of what Point Happy and, the Clark years would have represented. 12. Staff asked Ms. McKenna to explain the four criteria to thE\ Commission. Ms. McKenna stated Criterias 1 and 2 are the associations with events and persons and gave examples of people and events that fit the criteria. She said Criteria 4 is sort of a catchall which allows for the potential of buried resources and the ability to do additional research. She then, gave examples of several local family histories which would help qualify the project for Criteria 4. She said the project met three of the four criteria for the California Register of HistO,ric Resources. It would take a stronger case to qualify for the National Register. She didn't think it would qualify ur:Jless something really significant came up during the monitoring, but this was certainly a California Historic Landmark. 13. Staff commented the next step would be to go through the nomination process. The applicant and the applicant's representative could help in doing this as we would need to get the primary record from them as well as a letter from this Commission and the balance of documentation for nomination. Staff asked if that was the Commission's wishes. The Commissioners unanimously agreed. 14. Commissioner Sharp asked why the Duponts were not included in the report. Ms. McKenna replied she did not go into a lot of detail because she was zeroing in on this particular property. She did the same thing with Miss Marble. They had a lot of information, but had to draw the line as to where they were going to limit the documentation. Mrs. Neeley and her oral history made reference to all the movie people. 13 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 15. Chairperson Mouriquand said' there was approximately three hours of video and she would like to see it; She mentioned possibly the rest of the Commissioners, as well as Council. might like to see it. Staff said they were working out some form of accountability as to. who had the video, possibly a check out system, They suggested another ~p'propriate system would be tG check with the City Clerk to see if they had any measure, or method to duplicate the video to perhaps a DVD or CD Rom. Staff will look into it and get back to the Commission. 16. Ms. McKenna made a 'comment about their attempts to add some interest, to the video, by pretending they were Huell Howser. This, however, di<;l make an honest case for the Commission to ask Mr. Howser to come back and re-do the interview. If he were to interview Mrs. Neeley, about early La Guinta, it would be a good story. She suggested a copy of the ,tape be sent to him, 17. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested, in lieu of checking out the . videos, possibly a movie night could be planned for all the Commissioners to see it, They could then decide how to proceed as far as promoting and designating the report and video. She said staff could have copies made and devise a check out system as well as archive some copies, Duplicate copies could be provided to the Library and other appropriate places, 18. Ms. McKenna said they spliced together the original cassettes to make the copy they have now. She suggested the original could be made available if staff had means of burning a CD. 19, Applicant's representative, Ed Alderson asked how many copies were made. Ms, McKenna replied an original and three copies. two of which were given to the City, and one to Ms. Neeley. 20. Staff said they would check to find out what is available on the City's media system, 14 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 " 21. Staff said they would bring back an outline, with as much information as possible, on the nomination procedures, for a State Historic Landmark. They were unsure if the Council needed to provide a letter, but would check on this. Chairperson Mouriquand said the Commission had SHPO powers, as a CLG, and could write the letter. Staff stated they would begin putting the primary records together and bring the information back to the Commission. Ms. McKenna asked it the applicant could gain any tax credit through the Mills act. Chairperson Mouriquand answered there were no Mills Act contracts in place in La Quinta, but it needs to come back for, discussion as the project might qualify. Possibly staff could look into this and forward the information to the property owner so they could see how this would benefit them because it required property owner's authorization to proceed. It would definitely be to the owner's advantage for property taxes. . 22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilbur and Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2004-011 accepting the Cultu.ral Resources Investigation of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area as submitted. The Commission also directed staff to seek .the nomination for California Historic Landmark for the Point Happy Ranch Site. Unanimously approved with Commissioners Puente and Wright being absent. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Sharp stated he was concerned about the rescheduling of Gary Resvaloso's presentation. The Commission had not heard anything further and wanted to know the status of Mr. Resvaloso's upcoming presentation. Staff replied they had made numerous contacts with Mr. Resvaloso's office, but had nothing definite yet. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested staff send a letter to Mr. Resvaloso inviting him to make his presentation at an upcoming meeting. She added the Commission could also invite representatives from the Augustine, Santa Rosa, and Cabazon Bands to attend a future meeting. 15 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 B. Commissioner 'Wilbur commented that at the last meeting there was a discussion about May being Historic Preservation Month and with La Quinta being the only city in the Valley with CLG status there should be a news release about the Commission's Ten Year Anniversary and accomplishments. The point being May is almost over. One thing about public relations is if it isn't timely,it i~I'\'t used. Staff commented they spoke to the City Administration about the Commission's direction for a presentation and/or a plaque and was advised that although this Commission has done a wonderful job, this was not possible as it was not done for the other Commissions. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested staff try to get a newspaper article out before the end of the month. Possibly a few words about the Commission being 10 years old, and some of their accomplishments as well as the fact the Commission has just concluded the Point Happy Report. Staff asked if the Commission needed to see the article before it went out. Commissioner Wilbur has a Public Relations background and offered to take a look at it. C. Commissioner Sharp asked about presentation of information/notes from the California Preservation meeting the Commission attended earlier this month. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested each Commis~ioner make a five minute presentation, at the June 17th meeting of the information they received at the Conference. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp and Wilbur to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next Meeting to be held on June 17, 2004. This meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 4:34 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: ~~r~ Secretary 16