Loading...
2002 10 17 HPC�a�tuvct°ic Tay/ 4 cFM OFT HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AG EN DA The Regular Meeting to be held in the Session Room at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California OCTOBER 17, 2002 4:00 P.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2002-022 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 Minutes for the Regular meeting of September 26, 2002 and the Special Meeting on October 3, 2002. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Phase I and II Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report for the area Generally Bounded by Highwfay 111 Adams Street. Avenue 47 Washing= Street and Simon Drive Applicant: Dale F. Frank, Jr. Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love, Principal) --00.I HPC/AGENDA VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS VIII. ADJOURNMENT 00 e. HPC/AGENDA MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA September 26, 2002 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Maria Puente at 3:07 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 Irwin, Mouriquand, Sharp, Wright and Chairman Puente. 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 August 15, 2002, as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Phase I Historical an Archaeological Resources Surrey Reportfor -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) 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 Mouriquand asked if off site monitoring had been OBI PACAROLYWHist Pres Com\HPC 9-26-02.wpd -I- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 26, 2002 considered in the recommendation. Dave Twedt of Shea Homes, representing the applicant, pointed out that the project is just a right-of-way alignment, and is entirely located on the subject property and all activities will take place within the boundary. 3. Commissioner Wright asked if the two 1940s - 5Os era houses on the site were included in the original survey done of the City. 4. Commissioner Mouriquand said the survey was done before the subject area was part of the City of La Quinta. The survey should be updated. 5. Commissioner Wright indicated he would visit the site to view the houses present on the site. Although the Archaeology Report indicates the houses are of no historical significance, they should at least be documented with photographs before being demolished. 6. Commissioner Mouriquand asked about the history of the houses. She indicated the structures should be fully documented before demolition. Mr. Twedt said he believed the 1940 ranch house had already been torn down. A permit was received from the City's Building and Safety Department. 7. Commissioner Mouriquand pointed out that a demolition permit should never have been issued prior to the presentation to this Commission. A title search should be done. 8. Principal Planner Sawa explained that the Archaeology Report determined the structures had no historical significance. He believed a title search had been performed by CRM Tech. 9. Commissioner Wright said that if a building permit had in fact been issued by the Building and Safety Department, it could jeopardize the Commission's certification on a Federal level and create a liability for the City. He indicated the City could face litigation from the Federal Government, and the City Council should be notified. Commissioner Mouriquand concurred. Mr. Twedt believed that CRM Tech had documented the structure. 10. Commissioner Wright pointed out that the intention of this Commission is to prevent the destruction of valuable historical properties such as what had recently happened with the Neutra 004 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-26-02.wpd -2- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 26, 2002 House in Indian Wells. If the house is already gone, it is not the fault of the developer who had received a demolition permit, it is the fault of the City. 11. Commissioner Mouriquand said mitigation cannot be completed if the house has already been destroyed. She recommended a continuance of the issue until the matter can be resolved. 12. Mr. Twedt requested the Commission proceed as quickly as possible due to critical timing of the placement of water lines and delay of construction. 13. Commissioner Irwin reminded the Commission that time had been spent determining the wording for recommendation of off -site monitoring, and it has not been included in this case. She believes it should be included in every case. Staff will modify the condition. 14. Commissioner Wright apologized to the developer for delaying the project. Federal guidelines need to be followed and the issue of the houses should be resolved. This Commission has identified that anything more than 50 years old is historic, and shall be documented. A comprehensive report on the houses should have been submitted as part of the CRM Tech report. 15. Mr. Twedt informed Commissioners that it was not the intention of the developer Shea Homes to circumvent any City procedures. He believes the project is a great benefit to the City and asked that the issue be resolved as quickly as possible to allow the project to proceed. 16. Commissioner Irwin pointed out that this area was recently annexed and the Commission has not yet had a chance to historically review the area. 17. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if there was environmental work done for the annexation. Principal Planner Sawa replied that the County of Riverside did an environmental report. 18. The office of CRM Tech was contacted by telephone. In response to Commissioner Mouriquand, CRM Tech Project Historian/Architectural Historian Bai "Tom" Tang indicated that the 005 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-26-02.wpd -3- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 26, 2002 primary report on the houses in question was not yet completed, but should be done in one week. Commissioner Mouriquand requested the report be faxed to staff for review. 19. Commissioner Wright asked that CRM Tech finish the report and deliver it by Monday, September 30 in order for the Commission to complete its recommendation. The structure of most concern is 59-650 Madison Street. 20. Commissioner Irwin requested CRM Tech include the primary record in the report submitted to the Commission. 21. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Irwin to continue this item to a meeting to be held Thursday, October 3 at 4 p.m. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commissioner Irwin reminded staff to include Commission elections on the next appropriate agenda. Vill. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Irwin to adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to a special meeting to be held on October 3, 2002. This meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:29 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Lynda J. Kerney Secretary 006 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-26-02.wpd -4- MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A special meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 3, 2002 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Maria Puente at 4:01 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 Irwin, Mouriquand, Sharp, Wright and Chairman Puente. Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary Lynda Kerney. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: None. V. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Continued Phase I Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey RepQrt for the Realioned Madison Street betwe�A-venue 58 and Aver 64 Applicant: Coral Option I, LLC/T.D. Desert Development Archaeological Consultant: CRM TECH (Bruce Love, Principal) 1 . Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the revised staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Staff informed the Commission that the house at 59-650 Madison Street had been demolished. A permit had been issued by the Building and Safety Department without the Commission's review. The procedure has been revised to require all demolition permits to be reviewed by staff for value and possible review by the Commission. 007 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 10-3-02.wpd -1- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 3, 2002 3. In response to Commissioner Sharp's question about what constitutes grubbing, Mr. Twedt of Shea Homes explained that it is the removal of brush, shrubs and small vegetation on the site. 4. Commissioner Wright concurred with staff recommendations. He added that he was displeased with the oversight in issuance of the demolition permit and believes the primary record as submitted by CRM Tech is inadequate. He pointed out that this Commission exists to understand the cultural history of this community. A structure built in 1947 is an old structure for a community that is only 100 years old. He believes there should have been a photographic record of the house. More is known about the Indian tribes of this area than of the people who lived here in the 1930s, 40s and 50s. Commissioner Wright was adamant that this not happen again, and asked that a letter be drafted to the City Council. No decision on the viability of a historical structure should be made by the Building and Safety Department. If this Commission does not abide by the guidelines, there is no reason for it to exist. 5. Mr. Twedt assured the Commissioners that Shea Homes will be more vigilant in the future and will not allow this to happen with any of their future projects. 6. Commissioner Wright pointed out that it was not the fault of the developer. 7. Commissioner Irwin expressed remorse that there was no chance to do a better job of surveying the property. The Commission would not have stopped the demolition, but would have: had an opportunity to better document the structure. 8. Commissioner Irwin pointed out to staff that the off -site monitoring provision has still been left out of the recommendation. Staff assured the Commission that the information is on the record and will be included. 9. Commissioner Sharp concurred with staff recommendations and said this could have been the equivalent of the destruction of the Neutra House. The structure could have had tremendous significance. 10. Chairman Puente concurred with staff recommendations. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 10-3-02.wpd -2- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 3, 2002 11. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand/Wright to adopt Minute Motion 2002- 023 accepting the Phase I Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey Report for the Realigned Madison Street between Avenue 58 and Avenue 60. Unanimously approved. 12. Mr. Patrick O'Dowd, representative of T.D. Desert Development, added that as members of the community, they appreciate the work of this Commission and apologize for any inconvenience this has caused. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commissioner Mouriquand recommended adding to the next agenda the completion of the Historic Contact Statement that was tabled last year. 1. Commissioner Irwin reminded the Commissioners that funding must be identified to compete the survey. The survey has never been finalized. 2. Commissioner Sharp pointed out that the City has become larger since the survey was performed. 3. Commissioner Irwin pointed out that there were houses missed the first time. 4. Commissioner Wright believes the information should be updated each time the City annexes property. He suggested the Commissioners take initiative on their own to identify historic structures. 5. Commissioner Mouriquand explained that when the City annexes new land, a cursory level survey usually comes from the County. First, the County information must be reviewed. Then, research should be done at the Eastern Information Center at the University of Riverside. When new lands are taken in, it ought to be known whether the area had been surveyed, and it may contain historically significant structures. 6. Commissioner Sharp suggested that if surveys were performed 009 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 10-3-02.wpd -3- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 3, 2002 during the annexation process, it would not be such a monumental task at the end. 7. Commissioner Mouriquand said that the current procedure is to perform a survey only when it is triggered by development. The City could consider doing the work proactively without waiting for development. 8. Commissioner Irwin asked if any of this comes under the Commission's Charter. Commissioner Mouriquand explained yes, according to the Historic Preservation Ordinance, survey work can be recommended without development. There is no reason why the City can't initiate it, but funding must be found. The existing survey should be improved. B. Commissioner Wright reminded staff to include election of officers on the next appropriate agenda. Commissioner Sharp will be unable to attend the next meeting, so elections should be held at the November 21 meeting. Vill. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Irwin to adjourn this meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next regularly scheduled meeting to be held on October 17, 2002. This meeting of the Historical Preservation Commission was adjourned at 4:32 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Lynda J. Kerney Secretary \.... . . 010 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 10-3-02.wpd -4- HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2002 ITEM: HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT (PHASES I AND II) LOCATION: AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY HIGHWAY 111, ADAMS STREET, AVENUE 47, WASHINGTON STREET, AND SIMON DRIVE APPLICANT: DALE F. FRANK, JR. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSULTANT: CRM TECH (BRUCE LOVE AND MICHAEL HOGAN, PRINCIPALS) BACKGROUND: The study area is a vacant parcel of approximately 51 acres on the south side of Highway 111, between Simon Drive and Adams Street. Lowe's Hardware with a parking lot has been constructed in the middle of the area, fronting on Highway 111. A Phase I (survey level) cultural and historical resources assessment has been completed for a Specific Plan Amendment application (SP 87-011, Amendment #4) for construction of a shopping center development (Attachment 1). 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 required by the California Environmental Quality Act for the project application. DISCUSSION: An archaeological records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center located at UC Riverside. The records search indicated that the project area has been previously surveyed for cultural resources several times, the first being in the 1930's. The entire property and adjacent areas were recorded as archaeological Site CA-RIV-150, and believed to represent the remains of a large Native American village. Artifacts found in earlier surveys included chipped stone, groundstone, shell and stone beads, fire -affected rock, ceramic sherds, animal bone, gaming disks, and a cremation site (on the Lowe's site). A history of the various studies is included on Page 6 and 7 of the report. 011 p[\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 sp 87-011 amend #4 washington park .wpd 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 search did not indicate any historic use of the property to the present day. The intensive -level on -foot field survey of the study area resulted in the portion of Site CA-RIV-150 in the study area being located. Three loci were found, with Loci 1 and 2 being on the west portion of the project area. These areas contain ceramic sherds, groundstone pieces, animal bone fragments, fire -affected rock, and fire - affected clay. It was determined these artifacts were not in their original depositional context and are part of the fill material that was brought into the project area, probably during construction of Lowe's Hardware. Locus 3 was found on the east side of the project area and in its original context and not highly disturbed. This area contains ceramic sherds, groundstone pieces., animal bone fragments, fire -affected rock, and fire -affected clay. CONCLUSION: The identification of Locus 3 of Site CA-RIV-6769 constitutes a "historic resource," as defined by CEQA, which requires a Phase II testing and evaluation program prior to commencement of the proposed project. The Phase II testing has been completed by CRM TECH, with a letter addressed to the applicant summarizing the results, submitted to the City (Attachment 2). The field work phase of the testing program entailed surface scrapes, test units, backhoe trenches, and surface collection of Locus 3. Artifacts recovered included ceramic sherds, groundstone fragments, animal bone fragments, fire -affected rock, ;and fire - affected clay. The summary does not provide detailed results. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Minute Motion 2002- accepting the "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report - Washington Park Project" (Phase I), as prepared by CRM TECH, subject to the following conditions:. A. The final Phase II archaeological testing and evaluation report, including all new standard site records, shall be submitted to Community Development Department for approval by the Historical Preservation Commission, prior to final approval of the project by the City Council. B. On- and related off -site earth -moving activities, including clearing, grubbing, trenching and grading shall be monitored by archaeological monitors to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. p[\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 sp 87-01 1 amend #4 washington park .wpd 012 j ,1 C. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval by the Historic Preservation Commission, prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project. Attachments: 1. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report - Washington Park Project (Commissioners only) 2. Testing and Mitigation summary letter for portion of Site CA-RIV-150 Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner 013 p[\stan\hpc rpt ph 1 sp 87-011 amend #4 washington park .wpd �� j ATTACHMENT #1 HISTORICAUARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT WASHINGTON PARK PROJECT In the City of La Quinta Riverside County, California Submitted to: Dale F. Frank, Jr. Washington 111 Limited 7825 Southeast 76th Street Mercer Island, WA 98040-5558 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 August 5, 2002 Approximately 51 Acres La Quinta, Calif., 7.5' Quadrangle Section 30, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian Site CA-RIV-150 014 w MANAGEMENT SUMMARY In July and August, 2002, at the request of Washington 111 Limited, CRM TECH performed a cultural resources study on approximately 51 acres of vacant land in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. The subject property of the study is located on the southern side of Highway 111 between Washington Street and Adams Street, consisting of a portion of the northeast quarter of Section 30, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian. The study is part of the environmental review process for a proposed development project known as Washington Park. It is required by the City of La Quinta, Lead Agency for the project, 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 proposed 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 results of the study indicate that a prehistoric—i.e., Native American — archeological site, CA-RIV-150, has been previously recorded in and near the project area. During the field survey for this study, three artifact concentrations were identified. One of these, Locus 3, was found in its original context and consists of ceramic sherds, animal bone, groundstone fragments, fire -affected clay, and fire -affected rock. Due to the possibility of additional artifacts in subsurface deposits, the extent and significance of this locus cannot be ascertained without further archaeological investigations. The other two artifact concentrations, Loci 1 and 2, have been heavily disturbed and no longer retain contextual integrity. Therefore, these two loci do not qualify as "historical resources;' as defined by CEQA. Based on these findings, CRM TECH recommends that an archaeological testing and evaluation program be implemented to determine whether Locus 3 of Site CA-RIV-150 constitutes a "historical resource" prior to the commencement of the proposed project. The scope of the testing program should include surface collection, subsurface excavations, artifact analysis, and permanent curation of recovered artifacts at the City of La Quinta. Final disposition and other planning considerations regarding the locus will be formulated in the future on the basis of the results of the archaeological testing and evaluation program. In addition, CRM TECH also recommends that future grading and/or other earth -moving activities in the project area be 015 0 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS MANAGEMENTSUMMARY............................................................................................................i INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................1 SETTING..............................................................................................................................................3 CurrentNatural Setting..................................................................................................................3 CulturalSetting...............................................................................................................................4 EthnohistoricContext.................................................................................................................4 HistoricContext...........................................................................................................................4 RESEARCHMETHODS.....................................................................................................................5 RecordsSearch.................................................................................................................................5 HistoricalResearch.........................................................................................................................5 FieldSurvey.....................................................................................................................................6 RESULTS AND FINDINGS...............................................................................................................6 Records Search Results...................................................................................................................6 Historical Research Results............................................................................................................8 FieldSurvey Results.......................................................................................................................9 DISCUSSION.....................................................................................................................................11 Definition........................................................................................................................................11 SiteEvaluation...............................................................................................................................12 RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................12 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................................13 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................14 APPENDIX 1: PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS.......................................................................16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1. Project vicinity....................................................................................................................1 Figure2. Project area..........................................................................................................................2 Figure 3. Overview of the current natural setting of the project area........................................3 Figure 4. Previous cultural resources surveys in the vicinity of the project area.....................7 Figure 5. The project area and vicinity in 1855-1856.....................................................................8 Figure 6. The project area and vicinity in 1901..............................................................................8 Figure 7. The project area and vicinity in 1941..............................................................................9 Figure 8. The project area and vicinity in 1967 199.....................................................................9 Figure 9. Sketch map of Site CA-RIV-150.....................................................................................10 Figure10. Ceramic sherds...............................................................................................................10 Figure 11. Groundstone fragments................................................................................................10 LU0 INTRODUCTION In July and August, 2002, at the request of Washington 111 Limited, CRM TECH performed a cultural resources study on approximately 51 acres of vacant land in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California (Fig. 1). The subject property of the study is located on the southern side of Highway 111 between Washington Street and Adams Street, consisting of a portion of the northeast quarter of Section 30, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian (Fig. 2). The study is part of the environmental review process for a proposed development project known as Washington Park. 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 proposed development 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. ,y f S :+ &�'titll Nr Z 1 Ai - Project t � BgrM _S ! lncatinn -7,- +�/tj':•—`_+'::_ Ere ... .. (N'3iQNOWAAih "> •. > l,. COoeh kbm r. ,on=ny, x` :..Ram F _ 4 SCALE 1:250,000 , _�_. �u.ttus• 6 6 fOmilee;, Figure 1. Project vicinity. (Based on USGS Santa Ana, Calif., 1:250,000 quadrangle [USGS 19791) I i ?0 tiieiEs_- gv Project Bm --- area �.r. t� ,� - ""�..✓'% j ..jam � � F��[ a 6 �� •- i 1 i SCALE 124,000 �"•` ` •� 4J' {` k 0 1/2 1 mile r k 1 '• `t �(r� - 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 feet :�.• � F� :,re? '� e-'e;'`.' �_ 8.,;-Fc . iC4_. n..-.te �' . ,:- -- II ..r- j; c e ir�n•.� 2 1 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. The project area is bounded on the north by Simon Drive, on the west by Washington Street, on the northeast by'Highway 111, on the south by Avenue 47, and on the east by Adams Street. Elevations in the subject property range around 60-95 feet above mean sea level. The eastern portion of the study area is still in a fairly natural state and retains several large mesquite dune complexes. The land is relatively level in between these dunes and some areas contain sand blowouts. Vegetation at this locale consists of large desert bushes such as mesquite and creosote as well as small desert grasses and shrubs. This section of the project area has been somewhat disturbed by traffic from two large dirt roads and several smaller trails, and by the construction of two retention basins. The western half of the property is highly disturbed from its original state as a result of earth -moving activities. The land is level and a few dirt roads cross this section of the property. Vegetation in this area is similar to the eastern half of the property. It appears N4 .. y v 6 *, .?"..1i' - A�,;«oi %.. •y .r \ „� ram` Figure 3. Overview of the current natural setting of the project area. (View to the west, photo taken on August 1, 2002) 019 3 that the portion of the project area immediately to the south of Lowe's Hardware Store has been used as a fill area during construction of that building, while the natural state of the northern most tip of the property is currently being disrupted during street improvements occurring on Washington Street. 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 intc 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 ivVel, UnUI i ie Lualp.et,U1, U: L,'ie .7Uuuieli. 1-aCIIIL iNaUIULU ill Olt--161 i uiuuo ra an enG t0 its heyday. 020 4 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 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 In July 2002, CRM TECH archaeologist Adrian Sanchez Moreno (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, Moreno 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. HISTORICAL RESEARCH Historical background research for this study was conducted by CRM TECH historian Bai "Tom" Tang (see App. 1 for qualifications) on the basis of published literature in local and regional history, archival records of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 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 the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) topographic maps dated 1904, 1941, and 1959. These maps are collected at iric ✓CiClitc Li Gl ai) C,. �s lt. J;i'sV crSl ly' of mall?011da, 1�VUIS U: , aluC, LiLC �.alriV lila iJCScii District of the BLM, also Iocated in Riverside. 021 FIELD SURVEY On July 31 and August 1, 2002, CRM TECH archaeologists Daniel Ballester and Robert Porter (see App. 1 for qualifications) carried out the intensive -level, on -foot field survey of the project area. During the survey, Ballester and Porter walked the entire project area systematically along parallel north -south transects spaced 15 meters (ca. 50 feet) apart. In this way, the ground surface was carefully examined for any evidence of human activities dating to the prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years ago or older). Ground visibility was excellent (90-100%) throughout the project area. When artifacts were discovered, their locations were marked with survey flags. Upon completion of the survey, the artifacts were re -visited, and the site and locus boundaries were mapped. The resulting sketch map and verbal descriptions were then compiled into standard site record forms and submitted to the EIC for inclusion in the California Historical Resource Information System. The results of the survey are discussed below. RESULTS AND FINDINGS RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS According to records on file at the Eastern Information Center, the subject property had been surveyed for cultural resources prior to this study, and one large prehistoric—i.e., Native American —archaeological site had been recorded at this location, encompassing the entire project area (Salpas 1981:Fig. 2). That site, CA-RIV-150, was first recorded in the 1930s as a scatter of chipped stone, groundstone, shell and stone beads, fire -affected rock, ceramic sherds, animal bone, and "gaming disks" (Cowper 1933-1935). In 1951, Eberhart (1951) stated in an update that the site represented the remains of a large village, and contained many of the previously recorded artifacts as well as a cremation area. In 1967 and 1974, archaeological surveys of a portion of Site CA-RIV-150 located in nearby Section 19 found additional shell, ceramic sherds, animal bones, chipped stone, and some shell beads (Cowper and Ishii 1967; Corbin 1974). Another survey, conducted in Section 30 in 1977, found this portion of Site CA-RIV-150 had been highly disturbed but that three artifact concentrations, known as Areas 1-3, were still in their original depositional location (Lipp and Swenson 1977:5). All three of these concentrations were located in and around what is now the northern most tip of the current project area. A testing program was recommended in order to evaluate the vertical extent of these areas (ibid.:ll). A subsequent survey and mitigation program in that area found that Lipp and Swenson's Area i was disturbed bull shill contained a variety of artifacts (Salpas 1980;1981). Areas 2 and 3 were not a part of the 1980 study. Salpas (1981:19) concluded that this portion of CA-RIV-150 was inhabited around A.D. 1300 to 1850. A survey and monitoring program conducted in this same area resulted in the discovery of a single ceramic sherd (Brock 2000a; 2000b). It appears that the portion of Site CA-RIV-150 situated in the southeast corner of Washington Street and Highway 111 no longer exist, today. In 1985, a study on the Washington Square Property, which encompasses all of the current project area, recommended a testing program of the three artifact concentrations identified by Lipp and Swenson in 1977 (Swenson 1985). No further work on the property was done 022 until 1992, when LSA Associates of Riverside tested five loci and a few isolated clusters in the project area Uertberg and Rosenthal 1992:3). As a result of that study, the investigators found that that portion of CA-RIV-150 had been highly disturbed and its integrity "seriously compromised" (ibid.:56). Even though it was concluded that the site was part of a larger village complex that was extensively used during the Late Prehistoric Period, from around A.D. 900 to 1500 (ibid.:58), the site was not determined to be a significant historical resource (ibid.:59). Monitoring of earth -moving activities was implemented in 1993 on the northern half of the current project area (Broeker and Padon 1993). A cremation accompanied by two bone awls, ceramic sherds, and a Cottonwood Triangular point was discovered during monitoring (ibid.:7). Also collected were two cairn features, groundstone fragments, a woven fiber fragment, ceramic sherds, and a pumice block. An addendum report on the woven fiber fragment concluded that this piece was part of a small carrying net (Padon 1993:4). Outside the project area but within a half -mile radius, EIC records show approximately 20 other cultural resources studies covering various tracts of land (Fig. 4). In all, over 80% of the land within the scope of the records search was previously surveyed, resulting in the identification of 32 prehistoric sites, 7 historic -era resources, 2 sites with both prehistoric and historic -era components, and 2 isolates. The prehistoric sites typically consisted of ceramic and chipped stone scatters, habitation debris, cremations, and hearths/pits. The historic -era resources included the Point Happy Ranch complex, the Burkett Ranch, a 1930s residence, water conveyance systems, building foundations, and trash scatters. Wells Scope of RiAPRY records w._a search r r RProject area .. Areas previously4i. ' r surveyed ' r SCALE 1:24,000 1000 0 1000 feet Figure 4. Previous cultural resources surveys in the vicinity of the project area. Locations of historical/ archaeological sites are not shown as a protective measure. 023 7 '^3 Of the large number of historical/archaeological resources previously recorded in the vicinity, only CA-RIV-150 was found within or adjacent to the current project area. None of the other resources, therefore, requires further consideration during this study. HISTORICAL RESEARCH RESULTS In contrast to its demonstrated high sensitivity for prehistoric archaeological remains, the project area appears to be far less sensitive for cultural resources from the historic period. In the mid-19th and early 20th centuries, as Figures 5 and 6 illustrate, the only man-made features known to be present in what is now the La Quinta area were two roads traversing between present-day Indio, Indian Wells, and the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation. One of these roads, skirting around the foot of the Santa Rosa Mountains, was shown to pass through the current project area in the 1850s (Fig. 6). Judging from its course, this road was undoubtedly a part of the Cocomaricopa-Bradshaw Trail (Johnston 1987:115). Despite its location on this historic cross -desert artery, no evidence of any settlement or land development activities was noted in or near the project area in the mid-19th and early 20th centuries (Figs. 5, 6). In 1913, the northeast quarter of Section 30, including the project area, was patented to Norman and Anna Scott Lunbeck through a successful homestead claim (BLM 2002). Thirty years later, however, no trace of the Lunbecks' improvement on their claim could be found (Fig. 7). By the early 1940s, a number of new developments had appeared around the project area, including the Point Happy Ranch to the west, the Burkett Ranch to the south, Highway 111 along the northeastern boundary, and present-day Washington Street along the western -A .••� Project i area f� cR^�7,t 79'.cSYa a ua 4 i. L/JSvl6 10 a.PdC1 ` 1 I ° ,t..,c.l i raaj c�a� i __ Road f 4 0 2000 4CM0 tees .._. ^'� '• Figure 5. The project area and vicinity in 1855-1856. (Source: GLO 1856) Figure 6. The project area and vicinity in 1901. (Source: USGS 1904) 8 024 ' 4 boundary, which was known then as Marshall Street, the main access from Highway III to the La Quinta Hotel and the budding town of La Quinta (Figs. 7, 8). Within the project boundaries, however, the only cultural feature was a foot trail traversing from Highway 111 to the Burkett Ranch, and no buildings, structures, or other identifiable indications of development activities were found in the 1940s-1950s, or as late as the 1970s (Figs. 2, 7, 8). Based on its depictions in these maps, the project area has apparently remained vacant and undeveloped to the present time. FIELD SURVEY RESULTS As the results of the records search indicate, Site CA-RIV-150 was once recorded as encompassing all of the current project area. During the field inspection of the property, three artifact concentrations were identified within the project boundaries (Fig. 9). Loci 1 and 2, located in the west portion of the F < Project �<,•< area 4 �. a,�> � L Vim, •, f .k• ' • �*'�- SCALE 1:62,500 1.wr._.�;.:..._..e._.... 0 1 mile Figure 8. The project area and vicinity ir.1957-1959. (Source: USGS 1959) I t 18 l ,r 17 �1 I — 3 24 5�a�r Project ' 20 area r— _ ,----I?` :.. 2s , o 1 I $ SCALE 1:62,500 0 1 mile Figure 7. The project area and vicinity in 1941. (Source: USGS 1941) project area, consist of ceramic sherds, groundstone pieces, animal bone fragments, fire -affected rock, and fire -affected clay. These artifacts are not in their original depositional context and are part of the fill material that was brought into the project area, probably during the construction of Lowe's Hardware Store in the north. The third artifact concentration, Locus 3, was found in the eastern portion of the project area. This locus is in its original context and has not been highly disturbed. It consists of ceramic sherds, animal bone fragments, groundstone pieces, fire -affected rock, and fire -affected clay (Figs. 10, 11). Rapid development occurring in this part of the City of La Quinta has destroyed most of Site CA-RIV-150. It appears that the only portion of the site still in existence is what was found within the boundaries of the the site measures 740 m east -west and 425 m north -south in the western half and 220 m north -south in the eastern half. 025 Mm Artifact coneentmuon Previously Disturbed Area [ , WOU [ s^4 / Site Boundary Loma a Avenuo 47 `� u u Figure 9. Sketch map of Site CA-RIV-150, as recorded during this study. Figure 10. Ceramic sherds found at Locus 3. Figure 11. Groundstone fragments found at Locus 3. 10 026 ,. o DISCUSSION Based on the research results discussed above, the following sections present CRM TECH's conclusion on whether Site CA-RIV-150, the only archaeological site identified within the project area meets the official definitions of a "historical resource," 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, 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 eity'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 C.:i .J ll iuClli/ �:. 'v a_ualJi� L.,a_i Li;.c C2L,,v USL 6, ULL i1iUi&Cl iUU6 li dlLrlal or craftsmanship or is representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer or architect; or 027 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) Pursuant to these statutory and regulatory guidelines, Site CA-RIV-150 is evaluated under both the criteria for the California Register and those for the City of La Quinta's historic resources inventory. The results of the evaluation are discussed below. SITE EVALUATION Site CA-RIV-150 was first recorded as a extensive prehistoric village site containing human cremation remains, ceramic sherds, shell beads, chipped stone, and projectile points. Subsequent archaeological investigations conducted on various portions of the site indicate that the site was probably an encampment area associated with a larger village complex dating to the Late Prehistoric Period. Recent development in the vicinity of the project area has obliterated most of the site, and only a small portion of this resource is visible today in the eastern half of the subject property. This concentration of artifacts, designated Locus 3, measures 200 x 170 in and consists of ceramic sherds, animal bone, groundstone fragments, fire -affected clay, and fire -affected rock. Two other loci, Locus 1 and 2, were found in the western half of the property, but they are not in their original depositional context. These artifacts were probably placed in this area during modern construction activities, such as those associated with Lowe's Hardware Store to the north. Due to the loss of context, Loci 1 and 2 would not yield reliable information on the prehistory of Site CA-RIV-150. Locus 3, on the other hand, is in its original context and has the potential to yield important archaeological information. However, because its subsurface depth is unknown, the historic significance of Locus 3 of Site CA-RIV-150, and its qualification as a "historical resource," cannot be determined without further archaeological investigations, including subsurface excavations. In order to adequately evaluate the significance of this locus, additional research procedures will be necessary, as outlined in the section below. 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." project area, Loci I and 2 of Site CA-RIV-150, do not meet CEQA's definition of "historical resources," while the final determination of Locus 3's qualifications as a "historical 12 028 „__3 resource" cannot be made without additional archaeological investigations. Based on these findings, CRM TECH presents the following recommendations to the City of La Quinta: Earth -moving activities at Loci 1 and 2 should be monitored by a qualified archaeologist in order to collect the cultural materials that are present; A systematic testing and evaluation program should be completed on Locus 3, including the following procedures: • 100% surface collection of exposed artifacts; • Excavation of surface scrapes, subsurface test units, and possibly backhoe trenches in the locus area; • Laboratory analysis of artifacts recovered through archaeological field testing; • Preparation of a final report to document the results and findings of the procedures outlined above; • Cataloguing and preparation of all artifacts recovered from the locus for permanent storage at the City of La Quinta's curation facility. 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. During the course of the study, three prehistoric artifact concentrations were identified within the project area and determined to be parts of a previously recorded site, CA-RIV-150. One of these, designated, Locus 3, was found in its original context, but further archaeological investigations are required in order to determine the significance of the locus. The other two artifact concentrations, designated Loci 1 and 2, have been heavily disturbed, and do not qualify as "historical resources,' as defined by CEQA. Based on these findings, CRM TECH recommends that an archaeological testing and evaluation program be implemented to determine whether Locus 3 of Site CA-RIV-150 constitutes a "historical resource" prior to the commencement of the proposed project. The scope of the testing program should include surface collection, subsurface excavations, artifact analysis, and permanent curation of recovered artifacts at the City of La Quinta. Final disposition and other planning considerations regarding the locus will be formulated in the future on the basis of the results of the archaeological testing and evaluation program. In addition, CRM TECH also recommends that future grading and/or other earth -moving activities in the project area be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. 020 13 REFERENCES BLM (Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of the Interior) 2002 Online database of U.S. land patents. Available at www.glorecords.blm.gov. Brock, James 2000a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of a 5.65-Acre Property at the Southeast Corner of Washington Street and Highway 111, La Quinta, California. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. 2000b Report on Archaeological Monitoring for the La Quinta Court Project, Southeast Corner of Washington Street and Highway 111, La Quinta, California. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Broeker, Gale, and Beth Padon 1993 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report: Washington Square, CA-RIV-150, La Quinta, California. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Cowper, Dorothy 1933-1935 Archaeological site record, CA-RIV-150. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Corbin, A. 1974 Archaeological site record update, CA-RIV-150. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Cowper, Dorothy, and Chizomana Ishii 1967 Archaeological site record update, CA-RIV-150. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Eberhart, Hal 1951 Archaeological site record update, CA-RIV-150. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. GLO (General Land Office, U.S. Department of the Interior) 1856 Plat map: Township No. 5 South Range No. 7 East of the San Bernardino Meridian; surveyed in 1855-1856. Jertberg, Patricia, and Jane Rosenthal 1992 Archaeological Testing Investigation at CA-RIV-150, U.S.G.S. La Quinta Quadrangle, La Quinta, California. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Johnston, Francis J. 1987 The Bradshaw Trail; revised edition. Historical Commission Press, Riverside. Lipp, Don, and James Swenson 1977 Environmental Impact Evaluation: Archaeological Assessment of Washington Square Development, Indian Wells, Riverside Co nty, Cahlornia. Report on fiie, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Padon, Beth 1993 Addendum: Cultural Resource Monitoring Report: Washington Square, CA-RIV- 150. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Salpas, Jean A. 1980 An Archaeological Assessment of 9.5 Acres of Land in La Quinta. Report on file, LaS1Ci1. Ll.GIIl la .Jli `._eP: C!, V1tiV Ll S1Ly' fSl l,alll i3l. uh, 1liVe' Slut-. 1981 Mitigation of the Archaeological Site CA-RIV-150, Locus I, Cultural Resources Located on 9.5 Acres of Land at the Southeast Comer of Washington Avenue and 14 "3 0 1 ^ 0 Highway 111 in La Quinta, Riverside County. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. Swenson, James D. 1985 An Archaeological Assessment of the Washington Square Property, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Report on file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. USGS (United States Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior) 1904 Map: Indio, Calif. (30',1:125,000); surveyed in 1901. 1941 Map: Toro Peak, Calif. (15',1:62,500); aerial photographs taken in 1941. 1959 Map: Palm Desert, California (15',1:62,500); aerial photos taken in 1954, field checked in 1957 and 1959. 1979 Map: Santa Ana, Calif. (1:250,000);1959 edition revised. 1980 Map: La Quinta, Calif. (7.5', 1:24,000); 1959 edition photorevised in 1978. 031 15 �. 4 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. 032 16 t;ti,� PROJECT 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 eS6, Y n,iiil: 1-6 LIZlUd."i0... 333 17 r. 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. Test 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 yLii�VC2% il. � alc Lt. 1"tI .C1ic:.:,1`. v''.r.� .diCUF:, a .�L::C:1—",c:S.. 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. 034 is i� i�Y PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST Adrian Sanchez Moreno, B.A. Education 1999 B.A., Anthropology (with emphasis in Archaeology), University of San Diego. Professional Experience 2000- Project Archaeologist, CRM TECH, Riverside. 1999 Field Crew, excavation in Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Air Base, Oceanside. K.E.A. Environmental, San Diego. 1999 Field Crew, excavation at Freedmen's Cemetery site in Alexandria, Virginia. URS Greiner Woodward & Clyde. 1999- Field Crew, survey and excavation in Guerrero Negro, Mexico. • Including identification of osteological specimens. 1999 Field Crew, excavation at Lake Chapala, Baja California, Mexico. • Excavation and cataloguing of lithic artifacts from the oldest known site in Baja California. 1998 Field Crew, petroglyph survey in San Pedro Atacama, Chile. • Focusing on identification of possible habitation and petroglyph sites. PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST Robert Allen Porter, B.A. Education 2000 B.A., Anthropology, California State University, San Bernardino. Professional Experience 2001- Project Archaeologist, CRM TECH, Riverside. 2000 Archaeological field class under the direction of Claude Warren. Excavated units at Soda Lake in the Mojave Desert and produced lake bottom stratigraphic profiles, carbon sample collection. Honors and Awards Spring 2000 Dean's Honors List (G.P.A. of 4.0 in 15 units) Fall 2000 Dean's Honors List (G.P.A. of 3.9 in 12 units) 19 ,,',_7J Oct 04 02 09:21a Dale Frank & Associates (200) 275-4131 p.2 )))I$ CF?%l TECH 4472 Orange Street Riverside, CA 92501 Dale Frank Washington 111 Limited 7825 Southeast 76th Street Mercer island, WA 98040 Re: Archaeological Testing and Mitigation of a Portion of Site CA-RIV-150 Washington Park Project In the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California CRM TFCH Job tit 884 Dear Mr. Frank: ATTACHMENT #2 . September 27, 200 III August and September, 2002, CRM TECH was contracted to conduct an archaeological testing and mitigation program on a portion of Site CA-RIV-150, located on approximately 51 acres of vacant land in the City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California (Fig. 1). The portion of Site CA-RIV-150 being tested and evaluated during the current Phase II study is situated within the boundaries of the Washington Park project area located on the southern side of Highway III between Washington Street and Adams Street, consisting of a portion of the northeast quarter of Section 10, T5S R7E, San Bernardino Base Meridian (Fig. 1). The testing and mitigation program is part of the envirolunental review process for a proposed development project, as required by the City of La Quinta, Lead Agency for the project, 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). Site CA-RINI-150 was originally recorded in the 1930s, at wlich time it was described as containing prehistoric habitation debris associated with a large village site (see Love et al. 2002). Subsequent archaeological investigations of this resource over the years uncovered a number of artifact concentrations consisting of chipped stone pieces, rock cairns, groundslone fragments, and ceramic sherds. These earlier studies also found that the site had been extensively disturbed by construction activities associated with development projects occurring in the City of La Quinta (ibid.). During a Phase I archaeological/historical survey of the Washington Park project area cwnpleted oy CR&I TECH in August, 2002, three artifact concentrations (Loci 1-3) within Site CA-RIV-150 were identified within the boundaries of the subject property. These were recorded as consisting of ceramic sherds; groundstone fragments, animal bone pieces, fire - affected rock, and fire -affected clay. The cultural materials from Loci 1 and 2, however, were found to be in imported soil and, thereby, determined to not be in their original depositional context. Due to this loss of integrity, the artifacts found in this area would yield very little, if any, information regarding the prep story of the area. Locus 3, however, vans found to be relatively undisturbed and in its original depositional context. Therefore, in order to dete:nnine if Loafs 3 of Site CA-RIV-150 constitutes a "historical resource," further archaeological Investigations, including subsurface excavations, were recommended (ibid.:11-12). Between August 28 and September 10, 2002, the archaeological testing and evaluation program was implemented on the site tinder the direct supervision of field director Harry M. Quinn. Crei,,- members included CRM TECH archaeologists Josh Smallwood, Michael Lozano, and Daniel Ballester. 'Ihe fieldwork phase of the testing program entailed the excavation of 25 2X2- Tel. 909 784 3051 • Fax 909 784 2987 • Cell 909 376 7843 036 10-04-02 08: 08 RECEIVED FRO14:296 275 4131 P.02 Oct OA 02 09:21a Dale Frank & Associates (2061 275-4131 p.3 meter surface scrapes, 51xl-meter test units, and 10 backhoe trenches in Locus 3, as well as surface collection of all artifacts within the project area boundaries. The surface scrapes were generally dug to 20 cm, the test units to 100 cm, and the backhoe trenches to 200 cm. Artifacts recovered from these field procedures included numerous chipped stone pieces along with ceramic sherds, groundstone fragments, fire -affected rock, animal bone fragments, and fire -affected clay. Additionally, a feature containing numerous fire -affected rocks and groundstone fragments was uncovered during the excavation of a surface scrape and test unit in the western portion of Locus 3. This area also contained many chipped stone artifacts possibly suggesting that this was a chipping station where rocks were subjected to heat treatment prior to being made into tools. The continuing detailed analysis of the findings. from the field work will provide more information regarding the types of activities occurring in this portion of Site CA-RN-150. In light of the amique feature found during excavations and the number and variety of recovered artifarts, L ecar 3 of CA-RRI-' 5v clearly meats CEQA's definition of a' dstorical resource," and as such requires proper mitigation of project effects. However, the mitigation has been partially accomplished by the data recovery procedures discussed above. As a result of the extensive amount of data collected during the fieldwork, no further data collection trough arc logical excavations is required and project impacts to the site will be mitigated to a level of less t significant once the following procedures are completed: • Submittal of a final report detailing the results of laboratory analysis and interpretation of the artifacts recovered during the present study; • Archaeological monitoring during grading and other earth -moving activities within the boundaries of Washington Park project area due to high sensitivity for buried cultural) deposits. Under these conditions, the proposed project may be cleared to proceed in compliance with CEQA provisions on cultural resources. Sincerely, Michael Hugan, Ph Principal, CRNI TECH Reference cited: Love, Bruce, Bai "Tom" Tang, Daniel Ballester, and Mariam Dandid 2002 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Washington Park Project, In the City of La Quanta, Riverside County, California. On file, Eastern Information Center, Uruversity of California, Riverside. !�77 10-04-62 BE:09 RECEIVED FROM:206 275 4131 P-03 '!" Oct 04 02 09:21a Dale Frank & Associates (206) 275-4131 p.4 i I { 0 19 Ha PG> a Project area t i i :. �•• ! � yni SCALE 1:24.000 j 0 V2 o mile 1 • • �!.. • v 'a-� •� 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 C�00 teee Figure 1. Project area. (Based on USGS La Quint.,, Calif.,1:24,000 quadrangle (1980 editionjj 10-04-02 0£:10 3 038 RECEIVED FROM:206 275 4131 P.04