Loading...
2002 09 26 HPCGFM OF T1'O HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA The Regular Meeting to be held in the Session Room at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California SEPTEMBER 26, 2002 3:00 P.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2002-022 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Historic Preservation Commission on matters relating to historic resources within the City of La Quinta which are not Agenda items. When addressing the Historic Preservation Commission, please state your name and address and when discussing matters pertaining to prehistoric sites, do not disclose the exact location of the site(s) for their protection. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Approval of the regular Minutes for the meeting of August 15, 2002. V. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Phase I Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey Report for the Realigned Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60 Applicant: Coral Option I, LLC/T.D. Desert Development Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love, Principal) VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS VIII. ADJOURNMENT -001 "1001104001 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 15, 2002 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Maria Puente at 3:08 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked for the roll call. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance. B. Roll Call. Present: Commissioners Mouriquand, Sharp and Chairman Puente. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mouriquand to excuse Commissioners Irwin and Wright. Unanimously approved. Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary Lynda Kerney. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mouriquand to approve the Minutes of June 20, 2002, as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Historical/Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Report (4.6 acre portion of TT 30834) Applicant: Dave Bruduik (Santa Rosa Developers) Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love, Principal) Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 002 P:\CAROLYN\HPC8-15-02.wpd -�- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2002 2. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if the site had first been surveyed in 2001. Mr. Bruduik confirmed that it was. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand/Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 018 accepting the Historical/Archaeological Resources Report for the • 4.6 acre portion of Tentative Tract 30834 subject to conditions as recommended by staff. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mouriquand to adopt Minute Motion 2002-019 accepting the Paleontological Resources Report for the 4.6 acre portion of Tentative Tract 30834 subject to conditions as recommended by staff. B. Historical/Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Report (19.2 acre portion of TT 30834) Applicant: Dave Bruduik (Santa Rosa Developers) Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love, Principal) 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 asked if the property was formerly a date grove. Mr. Bruduik answered that it was not. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp/Mouriquand to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 020 accepting the Historical/Archaeological Resources Report for the 19.2 acre portion of Tentative Tract 30834, subject to conditions as recommended by staff. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Sharp / Mouriquand to adopt Minute Motion 2002-021 accepting the Paleontological Resources Report for the 19.2 acre portion of Tentative Tract 30834, subject to conditions as recommended by staff. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL A. Commissioners were given copies of the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society newsletter. 003 P:\CAROLYN\HPC8-15-02.wpd -2- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 15, 2002 B. A brochure from the National Trust for Historic Preservation regarding the October 2002 conference in Cleveland was provided. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commissioner Mouriquand provided information on Senate Bill 1828. She explained that procedures are being considered which would have to be adopted by this Commission and ultimately the City Council, and could change the processing time for cases, adding up to 60 days. It may necessitate consultation with local tribes, and could extend the area of concern around sacred sites from one mile to 20 miles. As written, it may also give tribes the potential to prevent projects from developing if they are unsatisfied with mitigation measures. B. Commissioner Mouriquand invited the Commission and staff to attend an informal meeting of the Colorado Desert Region Cultural Resource Managers on Friday, Oct. 2, 2002. The agenda will consist of presentations and discussion, with a goal of networking, education and partnerships. A registration sheet was provided. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand/Sharp to adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next regularly scheduled meeting to be held on September 19, 2002. This meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:25 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Lynda J. Kerney Secretary 004 P:\CAROLYN\HPC8-15-02.wpd -3- DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT: ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 26, 2002 PHASE I HISTORICAL AND RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT ARCHAEOLOGICAL REALIGNED MADISON STREET, BETWEEN AVENUE 58 AND AVENUE 60 CORAL OPTION I, LLC T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT CRM TECH (BRUCE LOVE, PRINCIPAL) The study area is a linear curved area proposed for the realignment of Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. Included in the study area are four future retention basins adjacent to the proposed street realignment. A Phase I (survey level) cultural and resources assessment has been completed for the property. The property has recently been annexed to the City at the request of the property owners. The assessment includes an archaeological and historical resources record search and field reconnaissance of the property. This assessment will be part of the Environmental review prepared for the future realignment application. DISCUSSION: Archaeological: An archaeological records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center located at UC Riverside. The records search indicated that 60% of the linear study area has been previously surveyed for cultural resources with more than 40 archaeological sites within one mile of the study area. No prehistoric sites were noted as located on or adjacent to the project area. One pottery sherd isolate was noted as found near the project boundaries. 005 p\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 madison st realignment for coral mtn.wpd As a result of the on -foot field survey only one isolated pottery sherd was found on the western edge of the proposed right-of-way, along the middle portion of the project route. Historical: Historical background research was conducted at the Science Library Map Room at UC Riverside and at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Office in Riverside. The research found that the study area was uninhabited until the late 1940's when a residence at 59650 Madison Street was constructed. A second residence at 58500 Madison Street was constructed around 1953-1954. These residences were probably associated with nearby agricultural uses. Although not able to document, both residences were probably altered over the years. Both residences have been abandoned for some time. CONCLUSION: The report states that the single isolate does not warrant further consideration. The two residences, while of an historic -era, are not associated with any persons or events of recognized significance in national, state, or local history, nor was an important architect, designer, or builder identified in association with their construction. Therefore, they do not qualify as a "historic resource" as defined by CEQA, In conclusion, the report states that no further investigation is needed unless buried cultural materials are encountered during construction. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2002-_, accepting the "Historical/archeological Resources Survey Report - Madison Street Realignment Project", as prepared by CRM TECH, subject to the following conditions: 1. Earth -moving activities, including grubbing, trenching and grading shall be monitored by archaeological monitors. 2. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project. 3. Collected cultural resources are to be delivered to the City of La Quinta for curation per City requirements. 006 p\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 madison st realignment for coral mtn.wpd v (i 4. Submit a Primary Record for the City Historic Survey for the residence at 59650 Madison Street prior to approval of the street realignment. Attachment: 1. Historical/archeological Resources Survey Report - Madison Street Realignment Project Prepared by: `� b r `�E)AAM Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner •. 007 p\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 madison st realignment for coral mtn.wpd 11 V �.J HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT MADISON STREET REALIGNMENT PROJECT Near the City of La Quinta Riverside County, California Submitted to: Grady N.Sparks Coral Option I, LLC T. D. Desert Development 79-285 Rancho La Quinta Drive La Quinta, CA 92253 Submitted by: Bruce Love, Principal Bai "Tom" Tang, Historian Daniel Ballester, Archaeologist Mariam Dandul, Archaeologist/Report Writer CRM TECH 2411 Sunset Drive Riverside, CA 92506 September 13, 2002 CRM TECH Contract #891 A pproximately 21.5 Acres Indio andpValerie, Calif., 7.5' Quadrangles Sections 27 and 28, T6S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian 008 ��`4 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY In August and September, 2002, at the request of Coral Option I, LLC, CRM TECH performed a cultural resources study on the project area of the proposed Madison Street realignment project near the southeastern limits of the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The subject of the study consists mainly of the future right-of-way of Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60, but also includes the locations of four future retention basins along the project route. The entire project area lies, in general, to the east of the current alignment of Madison Street, mostly with the west half of Section 27, T6S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian. The study is part of the environmental review process for the proposed project. The City of La Quinta, as Lead Agency for the project, required the study in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. The purpose of the study is to provide the City with the necessary information and analysis to determine whether the project would cause substantial adverse changes to any historical/archaeological resources that may exist in or around the project area, as mandated by CEQA. In order to identify and evaluate such resources, CRM TECH conducted a historical/archaeological resources records search, pursued historical background research, and carried out an intensive -level field survey. As a result of these research procedures, two historic -era residences, both constructed during the post -WWII boom period in Coachella Valley history, and a prehistoric isolate were recorded within or partially within the project boundaries. None of these, however, meets the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resource or in the City of La Quinta's historic resources inventory. Therefore, none of them qualifies as a "historical resource;' as defined by CEQA. No other buildings, structures, sites, or other potentially historic features were encountered within or adjacent to the project area. Based on these findings, CRM TECH recommends that the City of La Quinta may reach a determination of No Impact regarding cultural resources. No further cultural resources investigation is recommended for the proposed project unless project plans undergo such changes as to include areas not covered by this study. However, if buried cultural materials are encountered during construction, all work in that area should be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the finds. 009 TABLE OF CONTENTS MANAGEMENTSUMMARY............................................................................................................i INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................1 SETTING..............................................................................................................................................3 Current Natural Setting............••••3 CulturalSetting.............................................................................................................. EthnohistoricContext................................................................................................................4 HistoricContext............................................................................................................................4 RESEARCHMETHODS....................................................................................................................5 RecordsSearch.................................................................................................................................5 Field Survey ............••••5 HistoricalResearch.........................................................................................................................6 RESULTSAND FINDINGS...............................................................................................................6 RecordsSearch Results...................................................................................................................6 FieldSurvey Results.......................................................................................................................6 HistoricalResearch Results..........................................................................................................10 DISCUSSION.....................................................................................................................................12 Definition........................................................................................................................................12 Evaluation......................................................................................................................................13 Residences at 58500 and 59650 Madison Street....................................................................13 Isolate..........................................................................................................................................14 RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................14 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................14 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................16 APPENDIX 1: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS.......................................................................17 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1. Project vicinity...................................................................................................................1 Figure2. Project area...........................................................................................................................2 Figure 3. Typical landscape along the project route.....................................................................3 Figure 4. Previous cultural resources studies................................................................................7 Figure 5. A single potsherd found in the project area.................................................................8 Figure 6. Abandoned residence at 58500 Madison Street..............................................I.............8 Figure 7. Fagade of the residence at 59650 Madison Street..........................................................9 Figure 8. Brick -lined courtyard with swimming pool................................................................10 Figure 9. The project area and vicinity in 1856............................................................................10 Figure 10. The project area and vicinity in 1901..........................................................................11 Figure 11. The project area and vicinity in 1903..........................................................................11 Figure 12. The project area and vicinity in 1941..........................................................................11 Figure 13. The project area and vicinity in 1952-1959.................................................................12 010 INTRODUCTION In August and September, 2002, at the request of Coral Option I, LLC, CRM TECH performed a cultural resources study on the project area of the proposed Madison Street realignment project near the southeastern limits of the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California (Fig. 1). The subject of the study consists mainly of the future right-of-way of Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60, but also includes the locations of four future retention basins along the project route. The entire project area lies, in general, to the east of the current alignment of Madison Street, mostly with the west half of Section 27, T6S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian (Fig. 2). The study is part of the environmental review process for the proposed project. The City of La Quinta, as Lead Agency for the project, required the study in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; PRC §21000 et seq.) and the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Title 7, La Quinta Municipal Code). CRM TECH performed the present study to provide the City of La Quinta with the necessary information and analysis to determine whether the project would cause substantial adverse changes to any historical/archaeological resources that may exist in or around the project area, as mandated by CEQA and the City Ordinance. In order to identify and evaluate such resources, CRM TECH conducted a historical/archaeological resources records search, pursued historical background research, and carried out an intensive -level field survey. The following report is a complete account of the methods, results, and final conclusion of the study. I h caBE Ca 1MDt& .-�i r ( IND RE ' �'Yilfia HUls ' Il a tro t xd: CRy,�ibUNgM � � _ cM r ' COOChfIIO `1 I �;, Y !I- .. F', t 1 , � 77 Project location ryk , � � .� Ninrl, � T im I i.• . ...__ \ its.., � ..,• �..� 1 ". '.. -� � a�1 •- y:; .I `CAB. ztlNi _ } } "ff 1 'T TOHft[5 M TINE$ & e', 9J ,{` SNEtiMWNikIN T 1L..FCert !( F '61 1 .` �{N IAk ES 1 _ T RRES AiI$ Mei . . air e _ TORRES i09 W lC ��-MARTINl' �,.,.. a. 1, .1� .,..: 1. .Tank f�E3E RV ION i SCALE 1:250,000_ 0 S 10mil" ! lyy, In, z Car Figure 1. Project vicinity. (Based on USGS Santa Ana, Calif., 1:250,000 quadrangle [USGS 19791) O11 AVENUE 56 •" -z• m z . a 21 "y V � • f h. avErduE Se n Project v£ A':uE t . » 2� 3 27 La pulnb OuaC. --- InEb Ouatl. Mer4roz Mb. Ouatl. Valerie puatl. O ey y '.sauna 1--28 _ 27 L y ¢ .� ...._ " /li 4Y ... � CE4FF 33 34 SCALE 1:24,000 0 1/2 1 mile 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 feet Figure 2. Project area. (Based on USGS Indio, Valerie, La Quinta, and Martinez Mtn. Calif., 1:24,000 quadrangles [USGS 1972a; 1972b;1980; 19881) 012 SETTING CURRENT NATURAL SETTING The project area is located in the Coachella Valley, a northwest -southeast trending desert valley that comprises the western end of the Colorado Desert. Dictated by this geographic setting, the climate and environment of the project area and its surrounding region are typical of southern California's desert country, marked by extremes in temperature and aridity. Temperatures in the region reach over 120 degrees in summer, and dip to near freezing in winter. Average annual precipitation is less than five inches. Elevations in the project area ranges between approximately 50 feet below sea level at the northern end to 30 feet below sea level at the southern end. The proposed new alignment of Madison Street coincides with the existing alignment at both ends, and swings eastward along a curved line across abandoned agricultural fields. The land has been leveled for that purpose in the recent past, and shows signs of recent disking or plowing. Portions of the ground are covered with blow sand, while in other areas a hard compact soil is exposed. A sparse growth of typical desert vegetation, including saltbushes, tumbleweeds, small grasses, and a few creosote bushes, characterizes the typical landscape (Fig. 3). Two vacant houses, at 58500 and 59650 Madison Street, fall into the path of the proposed realignment project, both accompanied by remnants of past landscaping. These remnants consist mostly of domestic trees that are common in the Coachella Valley, such as date palms, fan palms, tamarisks, eucalyptuses, peppers, and citrus fruit trees, but also include pine trees and grape vines around the house at 59650 Madison Street. Near the northern end of the project area, vegetation grows rather dense, featuring saltbushes, small tamarisks trees, tumbleweeds, small grasses, and brush. Figure 3. Typical landscape along the project route. 013 W 'j'A CULTURAL SETTING Ethnohistoric Context The Coachella Valley is a historical center of Native American settlement, where U.S. surveyors noted large numbers of Indian villages and rancherias, occupied by the Cahuilla people, in the mid-19th century. The Cahuilla, a Takic-speaking people of hunters and gatherers, are generally divided by anthropologists into three groups, according to their geographic setting: the Pass Cahuilla of the San Gorgonio Pass -Palm Springs area, the Mountain Cahuilla of the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains and the Cahuilla Valley, and the Desert Cahuilla of the eastern Coachella Valley. The Cahuilla did not have a single name that referred to an all-inclusive tribal affiliation. Instead, membership was in terms of lineages or clans. Each lineage or clan belonged to one of two main divisions of the people, known as moieties. Members of clans in one moiety had to marry into clans from the other moiety. Individual clans had villages, or central places, and territories they called their own, for purposes of hunting game, gathering food, or utilizing other necessary resources. They interacted with other clans through trade, intermarriage, and ceremonies. Population data prior to European contact are almost impossible to obtain, but estimates range from 3,600 to as high as 10,000 persons. During the 19th century, however, the Cahuilla population was decimated as a result of European diseases, most notably smallpox, for which the Native peoples had no immunity. Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian reservations in and near the Coachella Valley, including Torres Martinez, Augustine, Cabazon, Agua Caliente, and Morongo. Historic Context In 1823-1825, Jose Romero, Jose Maria Estudillo, and Romualdo Pacheco, leading a series of expeditions in search of a route to Yuma, became the first noted European explorers to travel through the Coachella Valley. However, due to its harsh environment, few non - Indians ventured into the desert valley during the Mexican and early American periods, except those who traveled across it along the established trails. The most important among these trails was the Cocomaricopa Trail, an ancient Indian trading route that was "discovered" in 1862 by William David Bradshaw and became known after that as the Bradshaw Trail. In the Coachella Valley, this historic wagon road traversed a course that is very, similar to present-day Highway 111. During the 1860s-1870s, the Bradshaw Trail served as the main thoroughfare between coastal southern California and the Colorado River, until the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1876-1877 brought an end to its heyday. Non -Indian settlement in the Coachella Valley began in the 1870s, with the establishment of railroad stations along the Southern Pacific Railroad, and spread further in the 1880s, after public land was opened for claims under the Homestead Act, the Desert Land Act, and other federal land laws. Farming became the dominant economic activity in the valley, thanks to the development of underground water sources, often in the form of artesian wells. But it was not until the completion of the Coachella Canal in 1948-1949 that farmers 014 in the and region obtained an adequate and reliable water supply. The main agricultural staple in the Coachella Valley, the date palm, was first introduced around the turn of the century. By the late 1910s, the date palm industry had firmly established itself, giving the region its celebrated image of "the Arabia of America." Starting in the 1920s, a new industry, featuring equestrian camps, resort hotels, and eventually country clubs, gradually spread throughout the Coachella Valley, and since then transformed it into southern California's leading winter retreat. In today's City of La Quinta, the earliest settlement and land development activities did not occur until the turn of the century. In 1926, with the construction of the La Quinta Hotel, the development of La Quinta took on the character of a winter resort, typical of the desert communities along Highway 111. Beginning in the early 1930s, the subdivision of the cove area of La Quinta and the marketing of "weekend homes" further emphasized this new direction of development. On May 1,1982, La Quinta was incorporated as the 19th city in Riverside County. RESEARCH METHODS RECORDS SEARCH On August 28, 2002, CRM TECH archaeologist Laura Hensley Shaker (see App. 1 for qualifications) conducted the historical/archaeological resources records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), University of California, Riverside. During the records search, Shaker examined maps and records on file at the EIC for previously identified cultural resources in or near the project area, and existing cultural resources reports pertaining to the vicinity. Previously identified cultural resources include properties designated as California Historical Landmarks, Points of Historical Interest, or Riverside County Landmarks, as well as those listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, or the California Historical Resource Information System. FIELD SURVEY On September 9, 2002, CRM TECH archaeologist Daniel Ballester (see App. 1 for qualifications) carried out the intensive -level, on -foot field survey of the project area. The survey was accomplished by walking regular 15-meter (ca. 50-foot) transects parallel to the centerline of the proposed alignment, covering the entire project area, including the locations of future retention basins. Using this method, the project area was inspected systematically for any evidence of human activities dating to the prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years ago or older). For the most part, ground visibility was excellent (90- 100%) along the project route. In conjunction with the archaeological survey, on September 10, 2002, CRM TECH historian/architectural historian Teresa Woodard (see App. 1 for qualifications) inspected the two existing buildings in the project area, and completed field recording procedures on these buildings. In order to facilitate the proper recordation and evaluation of the buildings, Woodard made detailed notations and preliminary photo -documentation of their structural and architectural characteristics and current conditions. Woodard's ,.. 015 observations during the field inspection formed the basis of the building descriptions and historical integrity discussion presented below. HISTORICAL RESEARCH Preliminary historical background research was conducted by CRM TECH historian/ architectural historian Bai "Tom" Tang (see App. 1 for qualifications) on the basis of published literature in local and regional history and historic maps of the La Quinta area. Among maps consulted for this study were the U.S. General Land Office's (GLO) land survey plat maps dated 1856 and 1903, and the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) topographic maps dated 1904,1941, and 1956-1959. These maps are collected at the Science Library of the University of California, Riverside, the California Desert District of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, also located in Riverside. After the identification of historic -era buildings in the project area, Tang and Woodard pursued more specific and in-depth research on the history of these buildings. Sources consulted during this phase of the research consisted primarily of the archival records of the County of Riverside. In addition, Tang pursued oral historical interviews with several long-time residents of the Indio -La Quinta area. Information obtained from these sources is summarized in the sections to follow. RESULTS AND FINDINGS RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS According to records on file at the Eastern Information Center, nearly 60% of the project area was covered by previous cultural resources studies in the vicinity, but no cultural resources was recorded within or adjacent to the project boundaries. Within a one -mile radius of the project area, EIC records show over 20 previous cultural resources studies covering various tracts of land (Fig. 4). In all, more than 80% of the land within the one - mile radius was previously surveyed, which resulted in the identification of more than 40 archaeological sites. The majority of these sites were prehistoric—i.e., Native American —in nature, consisting predominantly of pottery and lithic scatters, habitation debris, fire hearths, and petroglyphs, but human cremations have also been reported. The few historic -era sites identified within the scope of the records search include structural remains, wells/cisterns, a water conveyance system, and trash dumps. Three of the sites contained both historic -era and prehistoric components, such as lithic and ceramic scatters and trash dumps. None of these previously recorded sites was located in the immediate vicinity of the project route, where only a prehistoric isolate, consisting of a single pot sherd, was discovered near the project boundaries. Therefore, none of the previously recorded sites requires further consideration during this study. FIELD SURVEY RESULTS During the intensive -level archaeological survey, one isolated prehistoric artifact was noted within the project area. The artifact was a pot sherd found on the western edge of the 016 9 V, 1 N ..AVENUE _ _. .__...b .. ._.... ... .yp ..�..iy"' Scope of 1936 ' records search 4 4492 I s f >..21 2 2W 26e7 4870 ion 16" .J " I L 2403 4202 VMUE 18 2103 v . III ` 420 2 7 I _ _ Indb Quad. k 1 247N4636L632Roo 1 M! 63214$85 p 1 ti 3..2 .. 4175 1 C . .. U VE6 g01 2470 1334 ^w 1 l 33 4175 867 J 18 4175 2470 4536 Project area Areas previously surveyed ---sl Linear surveys SCALE 1:24,000 00 1000 0 10 200o feet Figure 4. Previous cultural resources studies in the vicinity of the project area, listed by EIC manuscript file number. Locations of historical/archaeological sites are not shown as a protective measure. N 017 �� J proposed right-of-way, along the middle portion of the project route. The sherd was photographed (Fig. 5) and recorded as an isolate, and its location was plotted on project maps. No other archaeological sites, features, or artifacts were identified within or adjacent to the project area. Of the two abandoned houses in the project area, both evidently date to the mid-20th century, with features and characteristics suggesting that they are more than 45 years old. Therefore, both buildings were recorded as potentially historic during the field inspection, and described in further detail below. Figure 5. A single pot sherd found in the project area, recorded as an isolate. The house at 58500 Madison Street is a one-story concrete block structure constructed on a front -facing L-shape ground plan (Fig. 6). Its low-pitched cross -gable roof is covered with gray composition sheets, and the exterior walls are painted white, in contrast to the crimson trim. The asymmetrical fagade, facing the south, features an open veranda that extends almost the entire length of the building, supported by a series of square wooden posts, and a massive concrete block chimney dominates the front -facing gable end. Steel - framed casement windows constitute the majority of the fenestration. Figure 6. Abandoned residence at 58500 Madison Street. Insert: the front -facing gable end. 8 018 "11.11 The residence at 59650 Madison Street is in fact composed of two L-shaped single -story masonry structures forming a broken, rear -facing U-shape around a spacious courtyard that is now occupied by a swimming pool (Figs. 7, 8). The overall appearance of these structures is characterized by extensive verandas that encircle both structures on all sides, formed by extensions of the low-pitched cross -gable roofs resting on square wooden posts. These veranda, together with the white -washed exterior wall surface, the red ceramic the roof covering, and the brick -lined courtyard, give the design of the buildings a distinctive Spanish flavor. In comparison to the rear side of the buildings, where a lush growth of grape vines once screened the verandas around the courtyard, the plain facades facing Madison Street on the west are much more low-key and unpretentious (Figs. 7, 8). Windows in the northern structure are predominantly wood -framed casements or double-hungs, while those in the southern structure are mostly wood -frame French windows. A rather prominent chimney stands atop the roof of the southern structure. Behind these two buildings and at the far end of the swimming pool are two ancillary buildings, including one that appears to have served as the pool house. The two residences in the project area are situated in a rural setting, and are surrounded by abandoned agricultural fields and groves of landscaping trees. However, due to the growth of residential and commercial development in the Indio -La Quinta area in recent years, the rural character of the general vicinity of these residences is being altered rapidly. Figure 7. Facade of the residence at 59650 Madison Street. i�VUNJ 9 J13 y d d �. I . '��y1i 4 .A R } r� n '_ �N �t i".�fr;� fpr �i� �n}��i t N'R y}t �'a. at"' �yq x 'r 'lb{xl�nyr tN •✓<':i' i*# 8" tI 4 3F• £. J ,C It yW.' 4 {(h )ff t� Y. Il �+TR bf }4�h N'kYll iixPiYyi�' A'i� t �s SATM�v'� 15 r r , x y� t''" ' t.' `'�' �� #"•, �. ,.I _ w, tin" I� Figure 8. Brick -lined courtyard with swimming pool, behind the residence at 59650 Madison Street. HISTORICAL RESEARCH RESULTS Historical sources consulted for this study indicate that the project vicinity, and indeed the entire La Quinta area, remained unsettled in the 19th and early 20th centuries. During that period, the only man- made feature noted in the vicinity was a road traversing along the foot of the Santa Rosa Mountains, passing less than a quarter - mile to the east of the project location (Figs. 9-11). Identified as the road from Indian Wells to the Desert Cahuilla village of Toro or Torres (Figs. 10,11), this road is undoubtedly a part of the historic Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail (Johnston 1987:112,115-116). Despite the presence of this important desert trail nearby, no evidence of any settlement or land development activities was found in or near the project area, or anywhere in present-day La Quinta, in the r Project area A 06 VF .�! . itiiitit'i14111\� •r0 gi1j16 4•� .+y = `y mil. vrs•a t'. 0 200o ago teat Figure 9. The project area and vicinity m 1856. (Source: GLO 1856) 10 020 ilo � g.w S �. 3QT I r Project area k n., 1 VS SCALE 1:125,000" r 5 0 1 2 miles-- r "rx, Figure 10. The project area and vicinity in 1901. (Source: USGS 1904) the 19th and early 20th centuries (Figs. 9-11). By the early 1940s, the area to the southeast of the budding resort town of La Quinta showed a typical rural pattern of settlement, with scattered farmhouses connected by crisscrossing roads (Fig. 12). Among these roads was the forerunner of today's Avenue 58, which was lined by a number of buildings (Fig. 12). None of these buildings, however, was located in or near the project area. In fact, the earliest buildings within the project boundaries, representing the two residences at 58500 and 59650 Madison Street today, were not shown in the historic maps until the 1950s (Fig. 13). According to archival records of the County of Riverside, both of these residences date to the late 1940s or early 1950s, when a significant growth spurt swept through the Coachella Valley in the aftermath of the end of WWII and the completion of the Coachella Canal. The residence at 59650 Madison Street was evidently constructed around 1946-1947, about the same time r ; - 6540 - M . Project! 3� area J.,*9 js�!- "Y .poll' �SPcwt4 ` -i4© t eif a4P J(} +>o.t�v.r iY v?.3 4i cS'EC1' 3 r i . Al 0® feet /Jud Figure 11. The project area and vicinity in 1903. (Source: GLO 1903) 0 u 21. 22 C.>; A. --- %,- , ___. ' Project. ° 1 area I I ' '28 27 25 i I I 1 I ---- —_--- Lfv[�-1 -» t i £` { 35 2 ! 33 4L�....Yo���.. I i o I , o t �a.ap� +mffisxro SCALE 1:62,500 11 0® mile i Figure 12. The project area and vicinity in 1941. (Source: USGS 1941a; 1941b) 11 021 eA VLHUC50 Li N ✓Cull[ q_. _ _. k r l °•� ti ' 1a 1 �.,ad 12 a.. a .2J III Project ... .✓��u� 0�' at .� area r > 1 n0 t.. • AVEVVE • � h • .. s _ > M1 I i�3j 1 ! I A — n SCALE 1 6 PMf sa •vreuc 6Gmo �a t 0 1 mile su cn L J Figure 13. The project area and vicinity in 1952-1959. (Source: USGS 1956;1959) when Homer D. Fetty, a local farmer, acquired the 80-acre parcel of land around it (County Assessor 1945-1950:33; Ames 2002). The residence at 58500 Madison Street came into being some seven years later, around 1953-1954 (County Assessor 1951-1954:33). It was probably built by Rose Hirose, a long-time property owner, who subsequently deeded the parcel to Homer Fetty around 1957 (County Assessor 1944-1959:33). By then, the Fetty Ranch, as it came to be known among local residents (Ames 2002), had amassed much of the land along the project route, encompassing the southwest quarter of Section 27 as well as the south half of the northwest quarter (County Assessor 1955- 1959:33). Due to the lack of available archival data during this study, later alterations to these buildings could not be documented reliably, although both residences appear to have received some alterations over the years. DISCUSSION The purpose of this study is to identify any cultural resources within or adjacent to the project area, and to assist the City of La Quinta in determining whether such resources meet the official definitions of "historical resources;' as provided in the California Public Resources Code, in particular CEQA. DEFINITION According to PRC $5020.1(j), "'historical resource' includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, 12 022 . 13 agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California." More specifically, CEQA guidelines state that the term "historical resources" applies to any such resources listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined to be historically significant by the Lead Agency (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(1)-(3)). Regarding the proper criteria of historical significance, CEQA guidelines mandate that "a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be 'historically significant' if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources" (Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(3)). A resource may be listed in the California Register if it meets any of the following criteria: (1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. (2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. (3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. (4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (PRC §5024.1(c)) A local register of historical resources, as defined by PRC §5020.1(k), "means a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution." For properties within the City of La Quinta, the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance (Title 7, La Quinta Municipal Code) provides for the establishment of a historic resources inventory as the official local register. A property may be considered for inclusion in the historic resources inventory based on one or more of the following: A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering or architectural history; or B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history; or C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, is a valuable example of the use of the indigenous materials or craftsmanship or is representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer or architect; or D. It is an archaeological, paleontological, botanical, geological, topographical, ecological or geographical site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value; or E. It is a geographically definable area possessing concentration of sites, buildings, structures, improvements or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be greater than the value of each individual improvement. (LQMC §7.06.020) EVALUATION Residences at 58500 and 59650 Madison Street As discussed above, both of the two residences recorded in the project area during this study were constructed during the post -WWII boom period in Coachella Valley history. Buildings from that period survive in great numbers in the La Quinta area, in the Coachella Valley, and in southern California, and generally need to demonstrate a high level of 13 11.11 023 13 historic significance to be considered eligible for listing in the various registers of historical resources. The two residences in the project area, however, are not associated with any persons or events of recognized significance in national, state, or local history, nor was an important architect, designer, or builder identified in association with their construction. Furthermore, although the residence at 59650 Madison Street demonstrates much attention to the architectural design, detail, and craftsmanship, it does not qualify as an important example or specimen of its type, period, region, method of construction, or a special element in La Quinta's history. Based on these considerations, these buildings are determined not to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in the City of La Quinta's historic resources inventory. Therefore, they do not qualify as "historical resources," as defined above. Isolate The isolate recorded during this study consists of a single piece of potsherd. Such isolates, consisting of fewer than three artifacts, by definition do not constitute archaeological sites due to the lack of contextual integrity. As such, they are not considered potential "historical resources," and require no further consideration. RECOMMENDATIONS CEQA establishes that "a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment" (PRC §21084.1). "Substantial adverse change," according to PRC §5020.1(q), "means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired." Since no "historical resources," as defined by CEQA, were encountered during the course of this study, CRM TECH presents the following recommendations to the City of La Quinta: • No historical resources exist within or adjacent to the project area, and thus the project as currently proposed will cause no substantial adverse change to any known historical resources. • No further cultural resources investigation is necessary for the proposed project unless construction plans undergo such changes as to include areas not covered by this study. • If buried cultural materials are discovered during construction, all work in that area should be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the :nature and significance of the finds. CONCLUSION The foregoing report has provided background information on the project area, outlined the methods used in the current study, and presented the results of the various avenues of research. As a result of the study, two historic -era residences, both constructed during the post -WWII boom period in Coachella Valley history, and a prehistoric isolate were recorded within or partially within the project boundaries. None of these, however, meets 14 024 ry the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resource or in the City of La Quinta's historic resources inventory. Therefore, none of them qualifies as a "historical resource;' as defined by CEQA. No other buildings, structures, sites, or other potentially historic features were encountered within or adjacent to the project area. Based on these findings, CRM TECH recommends that the City of La Quinta may reach a determination of No Impact regarding cultural resources. No further cultural resources investigation is recommended for the proposed project unless project plans undergo such changes as to include areas not covered by this study. However, if buried cultural materials are encountered during construction, all work in that area should be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the finds. 025 15 ��S REFERENCES Ames, Paul 2002 Personal communication. Interviewed in Indio via telephone on September 10. County Assessor, Riverside 1945-1959 Real property tax assessment records, Book 25A. Microfiches on file, Riverside County Assessor's Office, Riverside. GLO (General Land Office, U.S. Department of the Interior) 1856 Plat Map: Township No. 6 South Range No. 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian; surveyed in 1856. 1903 Plat Map: Township No. 6 South Range No. 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian, California; surveyed in 1903. Johnston, Francis J. 1987 The Bradshaw Trail; revised edition. Historical Commission Press, Riverside. USGS (United States Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior) 1904 Map: Indio, Calif. (30',1:125,000); surveyed in 1901. 1941a Map: Coachella, Calif. (15, 1:62,500); aerial photographs taken in 1941. 1941b Map: Toro Peak, Calif. (15',1:62,500); aerial photographs taken in 1941. 1956 Map: Coachella, Calif. (15',1:62,500); aerial photographs taken in 1952 and 1953. 1959 Map: Palm Desert, California (15',1:62,500); aerial photos taken in 1954, field checked in 1957 and 1959. 1972a Map: Indio, Calif. (7.5', 1:24,000); 1956 edition photorevised in 1972. 1972b Map: Valerie, Calif. (75,1:24,000);1956 edition photorevised in 1972. 1979 Map: Santa Ana, Calif. (1:250,000);1959 edition revised. 1980 Map: La Quinta, Calif. (75,1:24,000);1959 edition photorevised in 1978. 1988 Map: Martinez Mtn., Calif. (73,1:24,000); 1981 edition photorevised in 1984. 16 026 �? APPENDIX 1: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Bruce Love, Ph.D., RPA (Register of Professional Archaeologists) Education 1986 Ph. D., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1981 M.A., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1976 B.A., Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1996 "CEQA 101," presented by the Association of Environmental Professionals. 1995 "CEQA Workshop," presented by Association of Environmental Professionals. 1994 "Assessing the Significance of Historic Archaeological Sites," presented by the Historic Preservation Program, University of Nevada, Reno. 1994 "CEQA 1994: Issues, Trends, and Advanced Topics," presented by UCLA Extension. 1990 "Introduction to Federal Projects and Historic Preservation Law," presented by U.S. General Services Administration Training Center. Professional Experience 1993- Owner and Principal, CRM TECH, Riverside. 1990-1993 Director, Archaeological Research Unit, UC Riverside; Coordinator, Archaeological Information Center, UC Riverside. 1989-1990 Coordinator, Archaeological Information Center, UCLA. 1987-1990 Owner and Principal, Pyramid Archaeology, Palmdale, California. 1986-1987 Junior Fellow, Dumbarton Oaks Center for Pre -Columbian Research, Washington, D.C. 1981-1986 Part-time cultural resources management consultant; doctoral student at UCLA. Memberships Register of Professional Archaeologists. Association of Environmental Professionals. American Planning Association. Society for American Archaeology. Society for California Archaeology. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society. Coachella Valley Archaeological Society. Archaeological Survey Association. 17 027 n,3 �J t- J PROJECT HISTORIAN/ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN Bai "Tom" Tang, M.A. Education 1988-1993 Graduate Program in Public History/Historic Preservation, UC Riverside. 1987 M.A., American History, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 1982 B.A., History, Northwestern University, Van, China. 2000 "Introduction to Section 106 Review," presented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the University of Nevada, Reno. 1994 "Assessing the Significance of Historic Archaeological Sites," presented by the Historic Preservation Program, University of Nevada, Reno. Professional Experience 1993- Project Historian, CRM TECH, Riverside, California. 1993-1997 Project Historian, Greenwood and Associates, Pacific Palisades, California. 1991-1993 Project Historian, Archaeological Research Unit, UC Riverside. 1990 Intern Researcher, California State Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento. 1990-1992 Teaching Assistant, History of Modern World, UC Riverside. 1988-1993 Research Assistant, American Social History, UC Riverside. 1985-1988 Research Assistant, Modern Chinese History, Yale University. 1985-1986 Teaching Assistant, Modern Chinese History, Yale University. 1982-1985 Lecturer, History, Van Foreign Languages Institute, Van, China. Honors and Awards 1988-1990 University of California Graduate Fellowship, UC Riverside. 1985-1987 Yale University Fellowship, Yale University Graduate School. 1980, 1981 President's Honor List, Northwestern University, Van, China. Cultural Resources Management Reports Preliminary Analyses and Recommendations Regarding California's Cultural Resources Inventory System (With Special Reference to Condition 14 of NPS 1990 Program Review Report). California State Office of Historic Preservation working paper, Sacramento, September 1990. Numerous cultural resources management reports with the Archaeological Research Unit, Greenwood and Associates, and CRM TECH, since October 1991. Membership California Preservation Foundation. 18 028 PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST/REPORT WRITER Mariam Dandul, B.A. Education 2002 (Exp.) M.A., Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton. 1993 B.A., Geography, California State University, Fullerton. Professional Experience 2000- Project Archaeologist, CRM TECH, Riverside. Laboratory and Field Experience 2001 Archaeological field school under the direction of Dr. Brian Byrd. `rest excavations of sites at the San Elijo Lagoon Reserve, including flotation of soil samples and sorting and cataloguing of artifacts. 2000 Archaeological field class under the direction of Dr. Claude Warren. Excavated units at Soda Lake in the Mojave Desert and produced lake bottom stratigraphic profiles. 1999-2000 Assisted in the catalogue of artifacts at the CSU, Fullerton archaeology laboratory. 1999 Field survey course under the direction of Dr. Phyllisa Eisentraut; surveyed and mapped prehistoric site in the Mojave Desert. PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST Daniel Ballester, B.A. Education 1998 B.A., Anthropology, California State University, San Bernardino. 1997 Archaeological Field School, University of Las Vegas and University of California, Riverside. 1994 University of Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico. Professional Experience 1999- Project Archaeologist, CRM TECH, Riverside. 1998-1999 Field Crew, K.E.A. Environmental, San Diego. • Two and a half months of excavations on Topomai village site, Camp Pendleton. 1998 Field Crew, A.S.M. Affiliates, Encinitas. • Two weeks of excavations on a site on Red Beach, Camp Pendleton, and two weeks of survey in Camp Pendleton, Otey Mesa, and Encinitas. 1998 Field Crew, Archaeological Research Unit, University of California, Riverside. • Two weeks of survey in Anza Borrego Desert State Park and Eureka Valley, Death Valley National Park. 19 029 -23 PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST Laura Hensley Shaker, B.S. Education 1998 B.S., Anthropology (with emphasis in Archaeology), University of California, Riverside. 1997 Archaeological Field School, University of California, Riverside. Professional Experience 1999- Project Archaeologist, CRM TECH, Riverside. 1999 Applied Earthworks, excavation of sites in Vandenburg Airforce Base. 1998-1999 Paleontological field work and laboratory procedures, Eastside Reservoir Project; San Bernardino County Museum, Redlands. 1998 Archaeological survey at the Anza-Borrego State Park; Archaeological Research Unit, U.C. Riverside. 1997-1998 Archaeological survey and excavation at the Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Air and Ground Combat Center; Archaeological Research Unit, U.C. Riverside. Memberships Society for American Archaeology. PROJECT HISTORIAN/ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN Teresa Woodard, B.A. Education 2002 (Exp.) M.A., Public History, University of California, Riverside. 1997 B.A., History and French, University of California, Riverside. 1996-1997 Education Abroad Program, Lyon, France Professional Experience 2002- Project Historian, CRM TECH, Riverside. 2001- Research Intern, Riverside Municipal Museum, under the direction of Dr. Brenda Focht. 2001 Intern, City of Riverside Planning Department, under the direction of Janet Hansen, M.A., Cultural Resources Specialist. 2000-2002 Planning Technician, City of Perris. 1998 Title Researcher, First American Title Company, Riverside. Honors and Awards 2000-2002 University of California Graduate Fellow, UC Riverside. 1994-1997 University of California Regent Scholar, UC Riverside. 20 030 s2v