2000 01 06 HPC Minutes
MINUTES
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
JANUARY 6, 2000
This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Robert
Wright at 3: 13 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 Mitchell, Puente, and Chairman Wright.
Commissioner Irwin was excused.
Staff Present: Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa,
and Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III.
CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. It was then moved and seconded by Commissioners PuenteIMitchell to approvl~ the
Minutes of November 17, 1999, as submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Phase I Archaeological Assessment for Environmental Assessment 99-38\Lfur
General Plan Amendment 99-064, Zone Change 99-092, Specific Plan 99-040Jllli\
Tentative Tract 29323; located at the northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred
Waring Drive. Applicant: Mr. Wade Ellis. Archaeological Consultant:
Archaeological Associates.
I. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Commissioner Mitchell stated he was pleased with the report and
complimented Archaeological Associates on the manner in which they
performed their probes.
3. Commissioner Puente asked for a definition of "mano" to which Planning
Manager di Iorio replied it was a Mayan pestle or hand tool.
P:\CAROL YN\HPCI-6-00.wpd
-1-
Historic Preservation Connnission Minutes
January 6, 2000
4. Chairman Wright commented the report was very thorough and to the point.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners PuenteIMitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2000-001 approving
Phase I Archaeological Assessment for Environmental Assessment 99-389
for General Plan Amendment 99-064, Zone Change 99-092, Specific Plan
99-040, and Tentative Tract 29323. Unanimously approved.
B. Phase IT Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation Report for Tentative Tract
29436; located on the north side of Eisenhower Drive, east of Coachella Drive.
Applicant: US Home Corporation. Archaeological Consultant: CRM Tech (Bruce
Love).
I. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Commissioner Mitchell commented on Site 33-8761, the Indian Trail, and
stated this types of cultural resource normally was not eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places. Recordation of these sites and their
features normally exhaust their research potential. He asked for an
explanation of why the trail was significant as it was not included as a DPR
form. He also asked for clarification on Page 10 of the report, where
standard testing was done by randomly placed excavation units and asked
why shovel test probes had not been used. Also, Commissioner Mitchell
asked for Dr, Love's definitions of pottery, such as buff, brown ware, etc.
3. Commissioner Puente commented on historic migration patterns from 1600
years ago and this site's significance.
4. Chairman Wright stated he had no problems with any of the
recommendations of staff and invited Dr. Bruce Love to make comments on
the report.
5. Mr. Marvin Roos, Mainiero, Smith Associates, corrected the location of the
project as being west, not south, of Laguna de la Paz.
6. Commissioner Mitchell asked about Site 33-8761, the Indian Trail and the
definition of wares. Dr. Love stated the Trail is more important than just a
trail because of the religious purposes associated with the cupules on the
boulder. And, it also appears that this was a trail that connected the
Cavendish Site of Indian Wells with the La Quinta area because it goes
through the saddle. It was the shortcut between Indian Wells and La Quinta
so the Indians did not have to go all the way around Point Happy. And it
would appear that it may be a territorial boundary of some sort between clan
groups or Indian groups. With the bedrock mortar being situated in that
P:\CAROL YN\HPCI-6-00.wpd
-2-
Historic Preservation Connnission Minutes
January 6, 2000
strategic spot, it seemed like it had a little bit more significance than being
just a trail, but only the base of the trail is actually on the property so there
is a question as to how the City can protect the bedrock mortar. Dr. Love
then made comparisons on the various testing systems.
7. Dr. Love went on to comment on the definition of the various pottery types;
Buff Wares versus Brown Wares and stated he was having a problem with
using the Colorado River typologies for Coachella Valley ceramics. He,
therefore, uses more generalized terminology to accommodate the
differences between the Colorado River versus Coachella Valley pottery.
8. Commissioner Mitchell agreed with Dr. Love's distinction between the two,
but advised Dr. Love to clearly define the terminology in his future reports.
Dr. Love agreed and went on to clarify his evaluation of the trail site.
9. Planning Manager di Iorio suggested the Commissioners look on Page: 52
which implies the significance is stated in Phase I Report.
10. Dr. Love affirmed that he probably should have included the information
from the Phase I Survey into this one to be more precise.
11. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Mitchell and Puente to adopt Minute Motion 2000-002
approving the Phase II Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation Report for
Tentative Tract 29436, subject to the staffs recommendations and the
following conditions:
a. Move information on the significance of the Trail from the Phase I
report to the Phase II report.
b. Include clarification of the definition of Buff Ware
Unanimously approved.
C. Phase III Archaeological Assessment of Site CA-RIV 2936 in Specific Plan 99.~
located northwest of the intersection of Highway III and Dune Palms Road and the
north side of Highway Ill, 350 feet east of Adams Street. Applicant: Troll-
Woodpark Company (Scott Gayner). Archaeological Consultant: CRM Tech (Bruce
Love).
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Mitchell stated he was looking forward to seeing the final
report on this project, especially comparing the subsistence strategies relative
to the number of bones or weight of bone at this location, as opposed to other
P:\CAROL YNlHPCI-6-00.wpd
-3-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
January 6, 2000
areas of the Valley or sites at other time periods. He complimented CRM
Tech on the report.
3. Chairman Wright and Commissioner Puente concurred with his assessment.
4. Dr. Love stated Scott Gaynor, representing La Quinta Corporate Center,
asked Dr. Love to clarify the statement, "before the issuance of the first
building permit"; as it relates to the timing of Dr. Love's report. Planning
Manager di Iorio stated this meant prior to the construction of the first
building. Currently, there was,only one approval and that was for the gas
station. The reference is to that building. Dr. Love asked if it was actually
the buildings or the streets and curbing. Planning Manager di Iorio replied
it did not refer to the street improvements or grading. Dr. Love thanked her
for the clarification and advised he would report back to Mr. Gaynor.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners PuenteIMitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2000-003 accepting
the Phase III Archaeological Assessment of Site CA-RIV A 2936 in Specific
Plan 99-036. Unanimously approved.
D. Phase I Historicl Archaeological Assessment for Future Commercial Development
located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. Applicant:
Madison Development (Ed Alderson). Archaeological Consultant: CRM Tech'
(Bruce Love).
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 Mitchell questioned the lack of backhoe usage, but deferred
the question to staff. He had no further questions on the report, but did state
the report was interesting, thorough, and comprehensive.
3. Chairman Wright commented on the enormous amount of grading done by
CalTrans and others, when Highway III was first constructed; it would have
effectively destroyed anything of value. He concurred with Commissioner
Mitchell on the report.
4. Commissioner Puente asked staff to clarify the "H" designation. Principal
Planner Sawa stated it meant Historic designation. The applicant had
indicated they found some sun colored amethyst glass pieces which are
believed to be early 20th Century.
5. Commissioner Mitchell and Dr. Love discussed the
advantages/disadvantages of surface collection versus backhoe trenching, and
why they are collecting artifacts even if the site is not significant. Dr. Love
replied he followed this practice as standard procedure. He could not justify
P:\CAROL YNlHPC1.6.00.wpd -4-
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes
January 6, 2000
letting an artifact be destroyed because it was not significant per the criteria
per the National Register. Commissioner Mitchell expressed his conc,:rn
about the costs of curation of all artifacts found, especially if there's no
provenance thereby not providing us with any information. Dr. Love
commented that it was a rule of thumb, even though it was not mandatl~d,
and when there is a site with a few artifacts that do not meet criteria for
significance, you collect the artifacts rather than see them graded under. He
told the Commissioners his work was mostly CEQA and very little Federal,
and that was the procedure he used
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners PuenteIMitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2000-004 accepting
the Phase I Historic/Archaeological Assessment for Future Commercial
Development located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and
Washington Street, subject to conditions. Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Planning Manager di Iorio told the Commission this meeting was scheduled as our
January meeting due to the urgent requests on the agenda,. The Commission will
resume their regular meeting schedule with the February meeting on February 17th.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners MitchelllPuente to
adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next regularly scheduled
meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission on February 17,2000. This meeting of the
Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. January 6, 2000. Unanimously
approved.
Sljbmitted by:
C/LU!!t-;/1L fL~ tlOeA-/
Carolyn Wklker
Secretary
P:\CAROL YNlHPC 1-6-00.wpd
:5-