Loading...
2003 10 16 HPCHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AG E N D A The Regular Meeting to be held in the Session Room at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California OCTOBER 16, 2003 3:00 P.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2003-012 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 meeting of September 18, 200:3 V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Continued - Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. Applicant: Madison Development. Paleontological Consultant: McKenna et al, Jeanette A. McKenna, Principal Location: West side of Washington Street, south of Highway 111 0 0:1 HPC/AGENDA B. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the City's SilverRock Ranch. Applicant: City of La Quinta Archaeological Consultant: McKenna et al, Jeanette A. McKenna, Principal Location: West side of Jefferson Street, between Avenue 52 and Avenue 54. C. Historic Preservation Commission Work Program Progress report. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS VIII. ADJOURNMENT 00r' HPC/AGENDA MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING The Regular Meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California September 18, 2003 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairperson, Leslie Mouriquand at 3:05 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 Puente, Sharp, Wilbur, Wright, and Chairperson Mouriquand. Staff Present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Martin Magana, and Secretary Carolyn Walker II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Puente to approve the Minutes of August 29, 2003 as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. Applicant: Madison Development Paleontological Consultant: McKenna et al, Jeanette A. McKenna Principal Location: West side of Washington Street, south of Highway 111 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department 003 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 2. Commissioner Sharp asked what the developer proposed with the entry gate. Associate Planner Martin Magana, project planner, replied the developer is working on a plan to retain the entry gate in a garden area on the property. A map of the location was shown. 3. Commissioner Sharp asked about retaining the date trees. Staff stated a previous owner of the property had conducted a study which identified the trees that could be retained. This developer intends to incorporate those trees into the development. 4. Commissioner Sharp asked if the Dupont house would remain. Staff replied it would remain with an access easement through the subject site to the house. There are no improvement plans for this house. 5. Commissioner Puente asked what was going to happen to the other buildings on the property. Staff replied they would be demolished. 6. Commissioner Wright stated the Commission had previously been through the whole site and most of the structures were no longer salvageable, nor had they retained their historical integrity due to modifications over the years. His concern was the main gate at the entrance to the property. 7. Commissioner Sharp asked if there was a way to determine the quantity of trees being saved. Staff replied there was a tree study done which listed specific trees that could be transplanted and saved. 8. Mr. Ed Alderson, applicant for Madison Development, replied they are very sensitive to the matter of the trees. It is their intention to retain as many of the historic trees as possible as well as a City -approved palette of trees. 9. Commissioner Wright stated he had no problem with the tree retention plan as proposed by the developer. 004 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 2 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 10. Commissioner Sharp asked staff to explain the "stars" shown on the map exhibit. Staff replied the stars represented existing trees. 11. Chairperson Mouriquand stated she did not find any discussion in the report regarding the National Register eligibility evaluation for this property. Point Happy Ranch is a property which has regional, as well as Focal significance. It is one of the first homesteaded properties in La Quinta and it has prehistoric connections with a major village site across the street. There was also no discussion of the prehistoric culture in the report. She then made an oral presentation about the significance of the site including the prehistoric history. She added there were numerous items of regional and national level significance that were not discussed in the report. She recommended a National Register eligibility determination be completed. In her opinion the report is not complete and should provide an evaluation of the National Register eligibility; and it does not provide enough historic information regarding the entire site. 12. Commissioner Wright agreed with Chairperson Mouriquand and added the previous developer of this property, was going to have a museum located on the property giving a history of the site. Staff agreed it had been discussed but was not made part of the final motion to be included in the commercial portion of the project for the prior developer. Commissioner Wright added he agreed with Chairperson Mouriquand there are some historic issues with this site that should be documented, not just with photographs, but with a more extensive report. He agreed the current report was not complete. 13. Chairperson Mouriquand stated it was not her intent to say that any of the buildings, etc., should be saved, but that a more complete cultural/historic context, with emphasis and evaluation on regional and national significance, needed to be completed. Staff asked for clarification on the recommendation asking if the analysis, based on the State and National Register regulations was adequate, or if more analysis was needed. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc D 0 5 3 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 14. Chairperson Mouriquand replied that as far as the conclusions on state significance criteria contained in the report, she has no objection, but the National Register criteria is not mentioned in the report. 15. Commissioner Wright asked what was being done on Lot D. Applicant replied the project would retain the two large trees at the front entry by placing them in a large planter. He also added the front entry and front entry gate would be placed in a garden setting located in a retention basin with an identification placard containing historical information regarding the Ranch. They had also planned to name streets, in the development, after the previous landowners. 16. Chairperson Mouriquand asked how the integrity of the gate would be kept if this was to be a functional retention basin. The applicant replied the gate would not be down in the basin. The landscape architects were currently designing the garden and would include a viable design for retaining the front entry gates. 17. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if this was going to be a gated community, not open to the public. Mr. Alderson replied yes, it was. She then expressed her concern that they would be taking away something of a historical nature from the public view and putting it into a private area where the public cannot view it. 18. Commissioner Sharp asked for the name of the development. The applicant replied it would be called "The Estates at Point Happy". 19. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if the developer had eliminated two lots near the front gate, would it be possible to work the front entry gate into an area where it would remain in the public's view. The applicant replied the access where the current gate is located is not the access for the project and described where the new access would be. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 4 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 20. Commissioner Wright asked if the entry was placed to the south, could the developer do something like what they did at Tradition and use the original entry way that would retain the view to the public. He expressed his concern that this was a gated community and the public would not be able to see the historic gates. The applicant replied he was not sure if that would be a workable alternative. 21. Discussion followed as to where the new gates were going to be placed and possible alternative locations for the gate structure. The applicant was concerned about relocation and the structural ability of the historic gates. 22. Staff suggested the Commission give some direction that staff could follow up with the applicant regarding modifications that could work regarding the gated. 23. Chairperson Mouriquand was concerned about the structural stability of relocating the gate and recommended the applicant work with the Public Works and Community Development Departments to provide staff with their current site plan including an overlay showing the precise engineered location of the existing historic gate on top of their site plan so they can see how it's going to work and look for a preservation opportunity with the gate left in place. This way the gate would not be functional, but still in view to the public and possibly a functional access driveway could be placed adjacent to. 24. Commissioner Wright stated he would like to see this entry treated similar to the one at the Tradition project. The gate is the historical part of the property and it should be incorporated into the project. Planning Manager Oscar Orci clarified that the motion should include a requirement that some Federal/eligibility criteria discussion be included within the analysis of the report 25. Chairperson Mouriquand added the report could be the only thing remaining of this significant cultural resource and it should be complete. Staff clarified that the report should provide more information regarding some of the other historical aspects including the stagecoach stop, PACAFOLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 1.. 00 5 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 the water wells, the trail, etc. Chairperson Mouriquand added it should include all time periods and place this property in its cultural context for both local and regional significance. She would also like to see this report submitted to the Commission prior to issuance of grading permit. The applicant asked for clarification of what the Commission was requesting. 26. Further discussion followed regarding the possible re- location of the historical gates and their function. The applicant reiterated his concern about the structural stability of the entry gates. The Commission stated they were requesting the archway be preserved. If additional engineering was needed to help with the structural integrity of the archway, that would be acceptable. Staff asked if that was a recommendation to the Planning Commission, or to staff. Chairman Mouriquand stated this is a request for the applicant to work with staff on the issues that have been discussed and bring it back to the Commission when the National Register evaluation had been completed as well as relocation plans for the historic gates. 27. Commissioner Wright replied it was a recommendation to both. The Commission would like to see the re -design before this project is approved. 28. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Chairperson Mouriquand and Commissioner Wilbur to continue this item to the next meeting directing the applicant to do the following; a. Obtain the services of a qualified professional to complete the Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. The report shall include all time periods that place this property in its cultural context for both local and regional significance. The report shall include such historical aspects, as the relationship to the Bradshaw Trail, the stage coach line, the water wells and prehistoric Indian villages and trails. 008 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 6 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 b. Work with the Public Works and Community Development Departments to provide staff with a current site plan which includes the location of the existing historic gate. C. The buildings on the site shall be reviewed under the National Register criteria and fully documented. Unanimously approved. B. Historic Preservation Commission Work Program 1. Planning Manager, Oscar Orci, gave an update on the Work Program, which included the following points: a. A request for the Commissioners to return the questionnaires/surveys distributed at the August 29th meeting. b. An update of the Historic Context Statement will be mailed to the Commissioners. C. An Archaeological Resources Management (ARMR) Document was distributed to the Commission. d. A primer for Paleontological report format and content will be reported back to the Commission when one is located. It was suggested it might be worthwhile to apply for some grant money to have this list made. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None V. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Materials were distributed for the California Native American Heritage Commission Professional Guide for the Preservation and Protection of Native American Human Remains and Associate Grave Goods. B. Materials were passed out and a presentation made by Chairperson Mouriquand regarding the 2nd Gathering of Colorado River Region Cultural Resources Managers to be held on October 24 and 25, 2003. PACAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 009 7 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 C. Commissioner Sharp inquired if it would be possible for the Commissioners to be taken on a tour of some of the more important historical sites in La Quinta including The Traditions, Point Happy and any other areas that may provide helpful background information to the Commission. It was decided the tour would be held during the weekend in October, or November. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc "' 8 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente/Sharp to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next Regular Meeting to be held on October 16, 2003. This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:45 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Carolyn Walker Secretary PACAROLYN\Nisi Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doe 011 11 9 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2003 ITEM: POINT HAPPY RANCH PROJECT (TENTATIVE TRACT 3'1348) LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET, APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111 APPLICANT: MADISON DEVELOPMENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANT: MC KENNA ET AL (JEANETTE A. MC KENNA, PRINCIPAL) BACKGROUND: This item was before the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) at the last meeting on September 18, 2003 (Attachment 1). At that time, the HPC determined that additional information was required prior to the HPC taking action on this item (Attachment 2). Specifically, the following items were requested: 1. Obtain the services of a qualified professional to complete the Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. The report shall include all time periods that place this property in its cultural context for both local and regional significance. The report shall include such historical aspects, as the relationship to the Bradshaw Trail, the stage coach line, the water wells and prehistoric Indian villages and trails. 2. The applicant shall work with the Public Works and Community Development Departments to provide staff with a current site plan which includes the location of the existing historic gate. 3. The site shall be reviewed under the National Register criteria and fully documented. As of this writing no written information has been submitted. The applicant wishes to discuss necessity and timing of these requirements with the Historic Preservation Commission. E2 P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc Staff recommends that items #2 and 3 be conditions of approval for the project, with the location of the gate in #2 subject to staff approval. The study in #3 should be completed and reviewed by HPC prior to issuance of a grading permit. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss item requirements with the applicant and McKENNA et al and consider Staff's recommendation above. Attachments: 1 . HPC staff report for September 18, 2003 2. Minutes of the September 18, 2003, Historic Preservation Commission meeting Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner ,.,._ OA P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc ATTACHMENT #1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 ITEM: POINT HAPPY RANCH PROJECT (TENTATIVE TRACT 31i348) LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET, APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111 APPLICANT: MADISON DEVELOPMENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANT: MC KENNA ET AL (JEANETTE A. MC KENNA, PRINCIPAL) BACKGROUND: The study area is an irregularly shaped property consisting of approximately 43 acres of which 19 acres are steep -mountain terrain. The property was used to raise Arabian horses and later to grow date and citrus. Presently, a number of the old buildings are used as rental properties. In 1999, applications for a retirement community and office complex on this property were applied for. As part of the environmental review process for that project, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed a Phase 1 Cultural Resources Assessment (Attachment '1). As a result of that review it was determined that mitigation of the historical aspects of the property was necessary, as well as archaeological monitoring during earth moving (Attachment 2). The historical mitigation measures required were as follows: 1. The Oral History Program shall be prepared in cooperation with the La Quinta Historical Society. 2. Collected materials shall become the property of the City of La Quinta per the City's Standards of Curation. 3. Prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit, whichever comes first, the developer shall meet with the Community Development Department and the Historic Preservation Commission to determine which existing features of the farm are to be incorporated into the proposed project. 0.14 P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc Those project applications were withdrawn in 2001 prior to being approved. We have received new applications from a different applicant to use the flat areas for a single-family subdivision. A new environmental assessment for this request is being prepared by staff as required by State law. The previous Cultural Resources assessment has been determined to be adequate for this request. Therefore, Staff has prepared this report to inform the HPC that the mitigation measures previously agreed to in 2'.001, as noted above, will be completed by the current applicant who has agreed to them. RECOMMENDATION: The current standard archaeological conditions of approval should be required for this project. Staff recommends that Minute Motion 2003- , be adopted requiring the previously recommended Mitigation Measures (#2 to be replaced by #5 below), adding that the oral history be completed by a qualified historian at the expense of the applicant, and the additional conditions 3 through 5 noted below: 1. The Oral History Program shall be prepared by a qualified Historian at the applicants expense, in cooperation with the La Quinta Historical Society. 2. Prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit, whichever comes first, the developer shall meet with the Community Development Department and the Historic Preservation Commission to determine which existing features of the farm are to be incorporated into the proposed project. 3. The site shall be monitored during on and off -site trenching and rough grading by qualified archaeological monitors. Proof of retention of monitors shall be given to City prior to issuance of first earth -moving or clearing permit. 4. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first production home building permit for the project. 5. Collected archaelogical resources shall be properly packaged for long term curation, in polyethylene self -seal bags, vials, or film cans as appropriate, all 'within acid -free, standard size, comprehensively labeled archive boxes and delivered to the City prior to issuance of first building permit for the property. Materials will be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 015 P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc Attachments: i . A hase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area 2. Minutes of the October 18, 2001, Historic Preservation Commission meeting Prepared by: �IGt�v., cJGtnnf G� Stan Sawa, Principal Planner 0116 P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc ATTACHMENT #2 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA October 18, 2001 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission wa alled to order by Chairman Maria Puente at 3:02 p.m. who led the flag salute an0 asked for the roll call. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance. B. Roll Call. Present: Commi loners Irwin, Mitchell, Sharp, Wright, and Chairman Pue . Unanimously approved. Sta/Present- Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Secretary Carolyn Walker. PUBLIC Cone CONFIRMHE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSE,)OT CALENDAR: A It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Mitchell to approve the Minutes of September 20, 2001 as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. —7rtt�-ITEMS A. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area: a request for approval of the Phase I Cultural Resources investigation of a 43 acre parcel of property located on the west side of Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111. Applicant: Point Happy Ranch, LLC - Archaeological Consultant: McKenna Et Al (Jeanette A. McKenna, 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. PACAR0LYN\HPC10-18-0l.wpd -1- C).L 7 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 2. Commissioner Mitchell concurred with the staff's recommendations. 3. Commissioner Wright stated he was in favor of staff's recommendations but thought the site should be monitored during any kind of excavation. 4. Commissioner Irwin also supported staff's recommendations but was concerned about monitoring the site and preservation of certain trees that are a part of Point Happy's history. She also pointed out Attachment #1, Page 004, had the wrong map. She added one of the buildings, on that property, was the first air- conditioned building in the Valley and the entrance itself, is historic. 5. Commissioner Wright stated it was in the City of La Quinta's Historic Primary Record. He added most of the buildings were dilapidated but still had historical significance as well as the entry way gates. When the Commission looked at the Tradition project they were very emphatic about every saveable building. As a result the garages near the Hacienda were saved. He suggested the staff report recommend every structure be looked at on its own historic merit. This project should be handled the same way Tradition was handled, including saving historic trees, especially since planting citrus was tried there for the first time, as well as experiments with growing cotton. 6. Commissioner Sharp stated he wasn't as familiar with the property as the other Commissioners but he does know Louise Neeley and he did know Alice Marble. According to the staff report photos there did not appear to be much worth saving. There was some good ironwork and it would be nice if it was incorporated somewhere in the project. 7. Chairman Puente asked if the applicant would like to address the Commissioners' concerns. 8. Archaeological Consultant McKenna pointed out Happy Lunbeck owned a larger parcel than what was included in this project and this portion did not have sugar cane, nor cotton. 018 P:\CAROLYN\HPC10-18-0l.wpd -2- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 9. Commissioner Irwin replied the Historical Society had photographs which showed these crops being cultivated on this property. Archaeological Consultant McKenna asked if they were grown in this specific area. Commissioner Irwin answered yes. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated she was not aware of this information while conducting her study. She used what information was provided. The original property was considerably larger, but this portion did not show any physical evidence of that type of activity. 10. Commissioner Irwin stated the road that goes up over the hill was once part of the stage line. 11. Archaeological Consultant McKenna agreed but stated the stage stop itself, was not on the property. 12. Commissioner Irwin stated it was at Indian Wells, across the street. She added the Cultural Report referred to Happy Lunbeck, while the staff report did not. Point Happy Ranch started in 1920 and got its name from Happy Lunbeck. 13. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated Point Happy, as the date farm, assumed the name. It wasn't called Point Happy Date Farm. 14. General discussion followed regarding the reference to Point Happy Ranch versus Point Happy Date Farm and the fact that the project property had become commonly known as Point Happy Ranch. 15. Commissioner Irwin asked who was contacted at the Historical Society. 16. Archaeological Consultant Jeanette A. McKenna stated she had spoken with Mrs. Louise Neeley, who was born and raised on the Point Happy property and she also referred them to another gentlemen who contributed the name of a third individual. That was why a recommendation was made in the report, that an Oral History needed to be prepared on this property. 019 P:\CAROLYN\HPCl0-18-01.wpd -3- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 17. Commissioner Wright stated his number one concern was preserving the structures that were deemed historic. They needed to be integrated into the project the same way the Hacienda was integrated into Traditions. 18. Principal Planner Sawa introduced the applicant's representative, Mr. Robert Sundstrom. He stated Point Happy LLC started working on the project approximately two -and -a -half years ago at which time they began looking into the history of the Ranch and the historical nature of anything that was still remaining. They went through a private assessment, filed an initial study and started the public process to have the City determine those buildings that potentially had any historical value in the site planning process. He added they did recognize there were a lot of significant trees in the project and did have an arborist do a complete count of every tree, every tree species, the nature of the tree, the condition of every tree, and the type of tree. The instructions given to the arborist were to look at the trees for condition, age, and the possibility of relocation on site and utilization within the project itself. It was the applicant's intent to reconstruct, or recreate, a date garden feel utilizing as many of the taller trees as possible. They would relocate the date palms that were in condition to be relocated. Their original assessment did not find any buildings that were of strict historical nature that could be either preserved or relocated on the property. A lot of the design criteria in this project relates to the Ranch, its history, the utilization of the ironwork throughout the project, and the installation of citrus in keynote areas to create the idea that this was a ranch and an operating citrus and date grove. The current plan does not incorporate any of the existing buildings. The only building that is currently proposed to be retained is "the Dupont House". The bulk of the houses have considerable structural deficiencies. He then offered to answer any questions. 19. Commissioner Sharp asked if the name of the project would be Point Happy, as it was an important landmark to the community. 20. Mr. Sundstrom answered the project was named "The Pointe at Point Happy Ranch". This was done to differentiate this project from the commercial project "Point Happy" on Highway 111. 020 P:\CAROLYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -4- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 21. Commissioner Sharp asked a question about the width of the entrance gate. 22. Mr. Sundstrom replied he had always been intrigued by the ironwork at the entryway gate. However, as the entryway was now it did not meet the current standards for the Fire Department. The new entryway/wall would be designed to emulate the wall and the fencing with the archway while meeting Fire Department standards. 23. Commissioner Sharp asked if there was a drawing of the building and landscape plans available and what type of architecture would be utilized. 24. Mr. Robert Sundstrom apologized that he did not have any large drawings with him. 25. Commissioner Wright asked why the Oral History was to be done by the Morongo Basin Historical Society, not the La Quinta Historical Society. He commented the Oral History should be done by the La Quinta Historical Society. 26. Chairman Puente asked if any of the remaining structures were in good condition. 27. Mr. Sundstrom replied no. 28. Chairman Puente asked what the possibility was to save or relocate them. 29. Mr. Sundstrom replied, in their assessment, the remaining buildings served no useful purpose from a historical point and therefore not incorporated into the site plan. There were a series of assessments done, but the only building to be shown of significance was the old school house which is no longer on the property. It has been the applicant's intent to incorporate the history of the Date Gardens, into the landscaping theme and incorporate the feel of the Date Gardens into the project itself. 30. Commissioner Irwin stated the La Quinta Historical Society had the City of La Quinta Curation Standards. She stated she was surprised to find an oral history project from the Morongo Basin Historical Society in the report directing all the information and P:\CAROLYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -5- 021 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 photographs to them. She then asked Principal Planner Sawa why this request was in the back of the report since the City already had standards in place. She added the City was building'a state- of-the-art facility and would be one of the few cities in Southern California to have such a facility. She wondered why another facility would be involved. 31. Principal Planner Sawa replied this may have been a recommendation in the report, but the City would have changed it to read the La Quinta Historical Society. 32. Commissioner Wright suggested a condition be added requiring the Oral History to be prepared in cooperation with the La Quinta Historical Society. 33. Commissioner Irwin stated if somebody else wanted to participate in the Oral History, they could work with the La Quinta Historical Society. 34. Archaeological Consultant McKenna commented the Oral History needed to be done in a fashion that was consistent with what had already been done. 35. Commissioner Irwin questioned the use of the Morongo Basin Historical Society. 36. Archaeological Consultant McKenna replied she had nothing in her report making that suggestion. 37. Commissioner Irwin directed the Commission to the back of the report. 38. Archaeological Consultant McKenna said it had been appended by someone other than herself. She only stated that the Oral History needed to be done. 39. Principal Planner Sawa thought the attachment was meant only as an example of what an oral history program would look like, and it should have been marked as a sample. 40. Commissioner Wright stated the concern was any material, oral history, photographs, derived from the Oral History, would become the property of the City of La Quinta. He suggested another P:\CAROLYN\l-1PC10- 18-01.wpd -6- n� 1.1 2 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 condition be added requiring collected materials become the property of the City of La Quinta per the adopted standards of curation. 41. Mr. Sundstrom asked if Oral Histories were privately prepared. 42. Commissioner Irwin answered she didn't know if they were done privately, but several Historical Societies in the Valley were currently working on Oral Histories. 43. Mr. Sundstrom stated he was more concerned with the format of the report meeting with City's standards. 44. Chairman Puente suggested a correction be made to this report stating the Oral History form be identified as an example of an Oral History. 45. Commissioner Irwin asked Mr. Sundstrom to indicate where the ironwork would be placed. 46. Mr. Sundstrom gave a summary of the project and the proposed site of the trees and ironwork. 47. Commissioner Sharp asked how many apartments would be in the development. 48. Mr. Sundstrom replied there were two structures with a total of 310 units. One unit is planned primarily for independent living, and the second independent clubhouse building was intended for use by the 62 villa units as opposed to the component of the independent living facility. 49. Commissioner Sharp asked if the clubhouse would have a dining room. Mr. Sundstrom stated yes. 50. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the condominiums were for seniors. Mr. Sundstrom replied the whole project was for seniors. 51. Commissioner Mitchell asked if a senior could move from one area to another, as their needs dictated. Mr. Sundstrom answered that was possible. He then went into the physical layout of the site plan, including street and pedestrian access. P:\CAR0LYN\1iPC10-18-01.wpd -7- - 1 3 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 52. Commissioner Irwin asked if there was going to be any access to the shopping center. Mr. Sundstrom replied there currently was none. 53. Commissioner Mitchell stated the archway was a very sensitive issues to the citizens of La Quinta. 54. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was also a sensitive issue with the existing property owner. The applicant had discussed the possibility of saving some of the physical features that are on the property including the gates and archway. There was a suggestion of using it in conjunction with a pedestrian pathway, or cart paths, so it would still meet Fire Department requirements. 55. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the scrollwork and any other appropriate historic objects could be placed in a central location to serve as a miniature display of what the Point Happy once was, and include the Oral History in the same locale. 56. Mr. Sundstrom indicated an area that was a water feature and suggested it might be possible to place items in that general area. He also discussed possible areas where these items could be incorporated into the project. He stated they would use as many of the different types of architectural features, as well as flora, to maintain the historic ambiance of the Date Ranch. 57. Commissioner Wright stated the different architectural styles was why it was so unique. 58. Commissioner Irwin stated another thing that makes this place so unique is the fact that the people who lived there were so self sufficient. They did a little of everything. They were finish carpenters and experimented with different crops. Even the Clark's themselves were very unique people. Mrs. Clark was so concerned about the children, who were growing up on that Ranch, that she sent the girls to high school away from there and built an air-conditioned house for them to sleep in. She also took the women to Idyllwild during the summer while the men stayed to work the Ranch. 59. Mr. Sundstrom acknowledged he had read the history of Point Happy Ranch. P:\CAROLYN\HPCI 0-18-0l.wpd -8- () 2 4 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 60. Commissioner Irwin asked if there might be a place to feature the original photographic history of the Ranch, so people would be able to see and understand the history of Point Happy Ranch. 61. Commissioner Wright commented it could be similar to what was done at the Tradition with their historical montage and items on the walls in the Hacienda. 62. Commissioner Irwin stated the difference was that Hacienda del Gato had been maintained and Point Happy had not. 63. Mr. Sundstrom stated he was not sure how to respond to that question. He had been working with staff to maintain as much ambiance in the project as they could. 64. Commissioner Irwin thanked the applicant for his efforts and reiterated this is a historic site and the Commission is concerned about not losing the history connected with this site. 65. Chairman Puente asked if there were any plans with more specific places where the historical features could be placed. 66. Mr. Sundstrom replied they did not have final construction drawings. He asked if the plans would come back to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval before the building permits were issued. He asked if the Commission had any ideas on what they would like to see, as well as specific locations. He would be happy to accept them because that was their original intent. 67. Commissioner Mitchell stated he like the project, but was concerned about the old Ranch and how things were going to be incorporated to retain the flavor and integrity of the original Ranch. 68. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was their full intention to build the project with those parameters in mind. He and his brother had drawn the landscape plan and written a good portion of the Specific Plan because they understood the history of this site and wanted to retain as much of it as possible. 69. Commissioner Mitchell asked if the Commission could see the Specific Plan. P:\CAROLYN\liPC10-18-0l.wpd -9- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 70. Principal Planner Sawa stated a copy of the Specific Plan was available. 71. Chairman Puente stated the Commission would like to review the Specific Plan, as well as a list of what items would be included and where. 72. Mr. Sundstrom then briefly went over some items in the Specific Plan with the Commissioners. 73. Chairman Puente asked if the Commissioners could each have a copy of the Specific Plan. Staff would provide copies to the Commission. 74. Mr. Sundstrom explained they were currently going through the Site Plan process. They needed to refine the placement of all the, specific features. The buildings are intended to be in the Castillian-Ranch-style with red tile roofs, slate type features on the facades with earth tones. This all lends to a character very similar to what is at Rancho La Quinta and the original La Quinta Resort. 75. Commissioner Wright stated he would like to see what was proposed as to where the walls, gates, and the porticos were going to be placed as the Commission would like the opportunity to comment on these plans. 76. Principal Planner Sawa stated a condition could be added stating prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit, whichever comes first, the developer shall met with the Community Development Department and the Historic Preservation Commission to determine which existing features of the farm are to be incorporated into the proposed project. 77. Commissioner Irwin commented on one of the date trees near the entrance of the property. 78. Mr. Sundstrom replied it was an Indian Red Gum that cannot be moved. It will die if you move, or trim it. He added most of the Date Palms were not salvageable, but the taller trees could be used in conjunction with a building that is relatively tall, which is what is proposed for this project. 026 P:\CAROLYN\HPC10- 18-0l.wpd -10- Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 79. Commissioner Wright concurred with his opinion but added it would be even more important if a photographic record was made of the property as it exists. 80. Mr. Sundstrom stated maintaining the historic integrity of the property would be a good marketing feature. 81. Commissioner Wright agreed stating the Traditions had found that to be very true. 82. Commissioner Sharp asked if the applicant proposed a museum on the site. Mr. Sundstrom stated they envisioned more of an all- weather outdoor display. 83. Commissioner Irwin suggested the streets or lanes be named after the people who lived and worked there. She also requested monitoring be required during trenching. 84. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated the report requested monitoring during all earth moving. 85. Commissioner Irwin asked if monitoring was needed during all earth moving, as this was not normally required. 86. Archaeological Consultant McKenna replied it was necessary for pre -history. 87. Commissioner Wright asked Commissioner Mitchell what his thoughts were on the necessity of monitoring during all earth moving. 88. Commissioner Mitchell replied monitoring was not necessary if the trenching was comprehensive enough to satisfy everyone in terms of exploration and subsurface. Otherwise, you would just do the major grading. 89. Archaeological Consultant McKenna stated that generally the rough grading, tree removal, and things like that are done initially to determine if there is any prehistory. The trenching is usually at the end for finish work where you get a look at the deeper substrata. If you do not do the rough grade monitoring, you may lose your pre -history. P:\CAROLYN\HPC10-18-01.wpd -11- ' • 027 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes October 18, 2001 90. Mr. Sundstrom monitoring is done on a daily basis. 91. Commissioners Wright and Irwin concurred it would be a beautiful project. 92. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Mitchell to adopt Minute Motion 2001-016 recommending approval of Phase I Cultural Resources investigation of a 43 acre parcel of property, located on the west side of Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111, subject to the condition as modified: 1. The Oral History Program shall be prepared in cooperation with the La Quinta Historical Society. 2. Collected materials shall become the property of the City of La Quinta per the City's Standards of Curation. 3. Prior to issuance of a demolition or grading permit, whichever comes first, the developer shall meet with the Community Development Department and the Historic Preservation Commission to determine which existing features of the farm are to be incorporated into the proposed project. Unanimously approved. B. ssessment For Tentative Tract 30331 • a request for roval of the cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract 30331, a vac t rectangular 4.18 acre parcel located on the north side of Avenue 50, west o efferson Street. Applicants: Santa Properties and Development LLC - Archaeol cal Consultant: Archaeological Advisory Group (James Brock). 1. cipal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in t e staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Deve pment Department. 2. Commissioner Mitchell concurred with staff's recommendations. 3. Commissioner Wright asked if all the dunes had been tested. 4. Applicant, Nick Santa stated he spent two -and -a -half days on the backhoe with the Archaeological Consultant. They tested the 028 PICAR0LYNViPC10-18-0l.wpd -12- ATTACHMENT #2 MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING The Regular Meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall Session Room 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California September 18, 2003 This meeting of the Historic Chairperson, Leslie Mouriqua for the roll call. I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of All(faiance B. Roll Call ivation Commission was called to order by 3:05 p.m. who led the flag salute and asked Present: Commissioners Puente, Sharp, Wilbur, Wright, and Chairperson Mouriquand. StaLl ff esent: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Martin Magaha, and Secretary Carolyn Walker II. PUBLI�, COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV, CONSENT CALENDAR: It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Puente to appw tie -Minutes of August 29, 2003 as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. Applicant: Madison Development Paleontological Consultant: McKenna et al, Jeanette A. McKenna Principal Location: West side of Washington Street, south of Highway '111 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department n?q Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 2. Commissioner Sharp asked what the developer proposed with the entry gate. Associate Planner Martin Magana, project planner, replied the developer is working on a plan to retain the entry gate in a garden area on the property. A map of the location was shown. 3. Commissioner Sharp asked about retaining the date trees. Staff stated a previous owner of the property had conducted a study which identified the trees that could be retained. This developer intends to incorporate those trees into the development. 4. Commissioner Sharp asked if the Dupont house would remain. Staff replied it would remain with an access easement through the subject site to the house. There are no improvement plans for this house. 5. Commissioner Puente asked what was going to happen to the other buildings on the property. Staff replied they would be demolished. 6. Commissioner Wright stated the Commission had previously been through the whole site and most of the structures were no longer salvageable, nor had they retained their historical integrity due to modifications over the years. His concern was the main gate at the entrance to the property. 7. Commissioner Sharp asked if there was a way to determine the quantity of trees being saved. Staff replied there was a tree study done which listed specific trees that could be transplanted and saved. 8. Mr. Ed Alderson, applicant for Madison Development, replied they are very sensitive to the matter of the trees. It is their intention to retain as many of the historic trees as possible as well as a City -approved palette of trees. 9. Commissioner Wright stated he had no problem with the tree retention plan as proposed by the developer. 10. Commissioner Sharp asked staff to explain the "stars" shown on the map exhibit. Staff replied the stars represented existing trees. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc U 3 0 2 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 11. Chairperson Mouriquand stated she did not find any discussion in the report regarding the National Register eligibility evaluation for this property. Point Happy Ranch is a property which has regional, as well as local significance. It is one of the first homesteaded properties in La Quinta and it has prehistoric: connections with a major village site across the street. There was also no discussion of the prehistoric culture in the report. She then made an oral presentation about the significance of the site including the prehistoric history. She added there were numerous items of regional and national level significance that were not discussed in the report. She recommended a National Register eligibility determination be completed. In her opinion the report is not complete and should provide an evaluation of the National Register eligibility; and it does not provide enough historic information regarding the entire site. 12. Commissioner Wright agreed with Chairperson Mouriquand and added the previous developer of this property, was going to have a museum located on the property giving a history of the site. Staff agreed it had been discussed but was not made part of the final motion to be included in the commercial portion of the project for the prior developer. Commissioner Wright added he agreed with Chairperson Mouriquand there are some historic issues with this site: that should be documented, not just with photographs, but with a more extensive report. He agreed the current report was not complete. 13. Chairperson Mouriquand stated it was not her intent to say that any of the buildings, etc., should be saved, but that a more complete cultural/historic context, with emphasis and evaluation on regional and national significance, needed to be completed. Staff asked for clarification on the recommendation asking if the analysis, based on the State and National Register regulations was adequate, or if more analysis was needed. 14. Chairperson Mouriquand replied that as far a:; the conclusions on state significance criteria contained in the report, she has no objection, but -the National Register criteria is not mentioned in the report. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 031 3 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 15. Commissioner Wright asked what was being done on Lot D. Applicant replied the project would retain the two large trees at the front entry by placing them in a large planter. He also added the front entry and front entry gate would be placed in a garden setting located in a retention basin with an identification placard containing historical information regarding the Ranch. They had also planned to name streets, in the development, after the previous landowners. 16. Chairperson Mouriquand asked how the integrity of the gate would be kept if this was to be a functional retention basin. The applicant replied the gate would not be down in the basin. The landscape architects were currently designing the garden and would include a viable design for retaining the front entry gates. 17. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if this was going to be a gated community, not open to the public. Mr. Alderson replied yes, it was. She then expressed her concern that they would be taking away something of a historical nature from the public view and putting it into a private area where the public cannot view it. 18. Commissioner Sharp asked for the name of the development. The applicant replied it would be called "The Estates at Point Happy". 19. Chairperson Nlouriquand asked if the developer had eliminated two lots near the front gate, would it be possible to work the front entry gate into an area where it would remain in the public's view. The applicant replied the access where the current gate is located is not the access for the project and described where the new access would be. 20. Commissioner Wright asked if the entry was placed to the south, could the developer do something like what they did at Tradition and use the original entry way that would retain the view to the public. He expressed his concern that this was a gated community and the public would not be able to see the historic gates. The applicant replied he was not sure if that would be a workable alternative. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc 032 4 Historic Preservation Commission Minutes September 18, 2003 21. Discussion followed as to where the new gates were going to be placed and possible alternative locations for the gate structure. The applicant was concerned about relocation and the structural ability of the historic gates. 22. Staff suggested the Commission give some direction that staff could follow up with the applicant regarding modifications that could work regarding the gated. 23. Chairperson Mouriquand was concerned about the structural stability of relocating the gate and recommended the applicant work with the Public Works and Community Development Departments to provide staff with their current site plan including an overlay showing the precise engineered location of the existing historic gate on top of their site plan so they can see how it's going to work and look for a preservation opportunity with the gate left in place. This way the gate would not be functional, but still in view to the public and possibly a functional access driveway could be placed adjacent to. 24. Commissioner Wright stated he would like to see this entry treated similar to the one at the Tradition project. The gate is the historical part of the property and it should be incorporated into the project. Planning Manager Oscar Orci clarified that the motion should include a requirement that some Federal/elligibility criteria discussion be included within the analysis of the report 25. Chairperson Mouriquand added the report could be the only thing remaining of this significant cultural resource and it should be complete. Staff clarified that the report should provide more information regarding some of the other historical aspects including the stagecoach stop, the water wells, the trail, etc. Chairperson Mouriquand added it should include all time periods and place this property in its cultural context for both, local and regional significance. She would also like to see this report submitted to the Commission prior to issuance of grading permit. The applicant asked for clarification of what the Commission was requesting. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC MINUTES 9-18-03.doc U 3 U 5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2003 ITEM: PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE CITY'S SILVERROCK RANCH (THE RANCH) LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF JEFFERSON STREET, BETWEEN AVENUE 52 AND AVENUE 54 APPLICANT: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANT: MC KENNA ET AL (JEANETTE A. MC KENNA, PRINCIPAL) BACKGROUND: The study area is an irregularly shaped property consisting of approximately 542 acres on which the City of La Quinta will construct a municipal golf course and tourist related facilities. Previously KSL Development Corporation owned this property and, in 1999, was proposing to develop the property and contracted with McKENNA et al to prepare a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment. That project request was withdrawn and the property was subsequently sold to the City of La Quinta. In order to proceed, this Phase I assessment is before you for review. REPORT ANALYSIS: An archaeological records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System at UC Riverside. Most of the study area has been previously surveyed. Only one archaeological site has been recorded within the area, with artifacts consisting of two sherds, one chert flake, one unifacial mano, and one quartzite projectile point tip. Other studies of the area have found isolate artifacts. Historical research was conducted at the Science Library Map Room at UC Riverside, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Office in Riverside, the County of Riverside Assessors Office and Recorders Office, and City of La Quinta Building and Planning Records. Additional contacts were made with local library sources, and contacts with knowledgeable individuals. This research resulted in one historic feature being identified, that being the Coachella Canal, that cuts through the site. This lateral of the All American Canal was completed in 1949. The property has P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31 348.doc 034 been until recent years used for agricultural uses. Structures remaining on the property include the Kennedy family residential complex (post 1950) near Avenue 54 and the buildings (post 1970 in construction) associated with the Ahmanson Ranch period of ownership near Avenue 52. Most of the agricultural crops and associated features have been removed or allowed to die. None of these features associated with this property are reported to be of historic significance. The Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento was contacted to inquire into the presence or absence of sacred places within the study area. Additionally, local Native American tribes were contacted for information. No relevant information was received as a result of this research. An on -foot survey of the property yielded no physical evidence of the historic (more than 50 years old) occupation of the study area. Remnants of the historic: groves and agricultural fields were noted. Six sherd isolates were found in the general area of Site CA-RIV-2842, the recorded site on the property. Two additional isolates were found in other areas of the property. The report concludes that although only eight isolates were found, six were found in the area of CA-RIV-2842 indicating that there may be subsurface archaeological deposits in the area. Therefore, monitoring of the archaeological site area should be done during earth moving activities. With regard to the structures near Avenue 52 associated with the Ahmanson Ranch, the City intends to retain them. Initially, one may be used for a temporary clubhouse for the municipal golf course. In the long term, they will probably be used for a city storage facility. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Minute Motion 2003- , be adopted accepting the cultural resources report as presented, with the requirement that the archaeological site be monitored during on and off -site trenching and rough grading by qualified archaeological monitors. Attachment: 1. A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of "The Ranch" project Area, prepared by McKENNA et al Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner 03;; P:\stan\hpc\hpc rpt tt 31348.doc 10%15/2003 17:37 760-771-0307 CHRISTOPHER KIERNAN PAGE 01 CHRISTOPH]ER D. KIERNAN ATTORNEY AT LAW 78 401 high yay 1 Ll, Suite E La Quinta, Califomia 92253. 760-771-3226 •.Fax: 760-771-0307 October 15, 2003 Rick Wilkerson Madison Development VIA PAX: (760) 771-0202 RE: Point Happy Ranch Entrance Dear Rick: I just wanted to confirm in writing the things I relayed to you earlier today relating to the ranch entry: 1. As one of a group of four investors, my father first became involved with the property back in .1972. At that time, the entire Washington St, frontage was bordered by a chain -link fence, though much of it was hidden by oleanders. There was only one entrance, located approximately where the cuirent entrance is, and it was merely a hinged section of the chain -link fence that swung open to allow vehicles in or out., After removing the padlock and chain, you had to push the gate open to get in or out. There is an older POINT HAPPY RANCH sign that was. . made by painting white letters on a dark -stained piece of wood and it is still there, though difficult. to see because of the bougainvillea. It hangs above the newer; black -on -while sign that we. erected in approximately 1987. 2. In 1974, my father and the other limited partners discovered that the general partner had been steeling the money they had been investing in the property. After the legal battle that ensued, it was not until 1976 that my folks became the sole owners of the ranch property and they did not construct any improvements on the property before it was in their name. 3.. I know that money was tight after paying all the legal fees, so I believe thatit was . not until 1971 or 1978 that they designed and had the current entry constricted. My folks. drew the design foi the wrought iron pattern inside the gates as well as the white -brick wall and planters on either side of the entry. The automatic gate openers; lighting fixtures and the sprinkler system in the planters were all put in at the time, which; as I have indicated, was in 1977 or 1978, as far as I can recall, but in no case prior to 1976. er on this. 'While I am not volunteering, because Let me know if you need anything fart] it would be a major pain to do. so, if it really becomes necessary, my guess would be that my mother kept those records and we could get copies from her office if you have to prove this in court, or something similar. it 3