Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2005 10 20 HPC
`N OF 7'LtF' Historic Preservation Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.orq HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA The Regular Meeting to be held in the Session Room at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California OCTOBER 20, 2005 3:00 P.M. Beginning Minute Motion 2005-022 CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call If. 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. Ill. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Approval of the Minutes for the meeting of September 15, 2005 Historic Preservation Commission Agenda V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Revised Cultural Resources Phase I Survey for the Costco Project B. Revised Cultural Resources Phase II Test for the Costco Project Applicant: HDR Engineering, Inc. for KOMAR Development Archaeological Consultant: Harris Archaeological Consultants (Nina Harris, RPA Location: South Side of Highway 111, Midway Between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road C. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report for Proposed Tentative Tract_ 33801 D. Paleontological Evaluation Report And Mitigation Plan For A 2.58 Acre Parcel Applicant: Blake Jumper Archaeological Consultant: Vanessa Mirro, Applied Earth Works Inc Location: West Side of Madison Street, 500 Feet North of Avenue 60 E. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report for Proposed Tentative Tract 33802 F. Paleontological Evaluation Report And Mitigation Plan For A 2.66 Acre Parcel Applicant: Blake Jumper Archaeological Consultant: Vanessa Mirro, Applied Earth Works Inc. Location: Calle Conchita and Madison Street, About 1000 Feet North of Avenue 60 G. Budget Allocations for Updating Historic Property Survey VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: VIII. ADJOURNMENT DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City.of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Historic Preservation Commission meeting of Thursday, September 15, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, Chamber of Commerce, and Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Friday, September 9, 2005. DATE : September 9, 2005 BET Y AWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California r002 G.\WPDOCS\HPC\hpc Agenda.doc 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 15, 2005 This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was called to order by Chairman Allan Wilbur at 3:03 p.m. He then led the flag salute and asked for the roll call. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Commissioners Mouriquand, Puente, Sharp, Wright, and Chairman Wilbur Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Fred Baker, Planning Manager Les Johnson, and Secretary Carolyn Walker II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and Mouriquand to take Items D and E first. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and Sharp to approve the Minutes of July 21, 2005, as amended. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Cultural Resources Phase I Survey for the Costco Project: Applicant: HDR Engineering, Inc., for Komar Development Archaeological Consultant: Harris Archaeological Consultants (Nina Harris, RPA) Location: South side of Highway 111, midway between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road 003 PACAROLYMHist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 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 which tribe requested the Native American monitor. Staff replied it was the Augustine Band. Commissioner Mouriquand suggested Recommendation E contain more direction as to how the developer could make these arrangements. She was also concerned about the Morongo Band's request to enter formal consultation and asked if the consultation had been initiated. Principal Planner Fred Baker replied the project had been through the 90 day request period for consultation and had received only one letter asking for consultation. A follow-up phone call from the Morongo Band's representative, Mr. Britt Wilson, confirmed he wanted to see the Environmental Impact Report and the Mitigation Measures. Staff is working with him on any additional information he may need. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if staff would be doing a government -to -government consultation or would this be done through the consultant. Staff replied any consultation would have to be government -to -government. Commissioner Mouriquand commented the report stated the consultant archaeologist would serve as a City representative in consultation, but that was not appropriate. Principal Planner Fred Baker replied staff would represent the City at any consultations. Commissioner Mouriquand requested the Commission receive a follow-up report on any consultations. Staff replied they could do a follow-up report as requested. Commissioner Mouriquand commented consultation would have to be concluded before the project could go to public hearing. Staff replied they understood. 3. Commissioner Mouriquand said she had e-mailed some comments to staff regarding Recommendations D and E. Staff confirmed they were received. Commissioner Mouriquand read the following comments into the record: a. Item D: What is the status of SB 128 consultation. Why did they use a '/4 mile radius when a one mile radius is required? Page 1: the phase 2 testing and report are to be completed and submitted to the city for HPC review and to complete the CEQA evaluation. Page 5: typo --should be Joseph Hamilton. I don't think a consultant can act for n04 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc 2 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 the city with regard to SIB 18 gov't to gov't consultations. Page 6: Which villages are they talking about as being clustered near the project area? Page 9: typo... should be Gypsum. Page 10: Why were the 1904, 1917, and 1940s maps not consulted for this project? Table A: the Hammer Property report is not listed in chart. She should tie in her discussion with the findings for that project which is not too far to the west of this project site. Page 19: where is the evaluation discussion for the sites? Page 20: what is their recommendation for those areas not exposed? Page 21: take out extra "1970" for Bedwell reference. The apparent goof -up on the SIB 18 process bothers me. Can we get the photos for the site records? It would be useful to see what she: found. Page 6: typo ...Should be "Earlier" rather than "E:arlir" in subsection heading. A review for typos is needed. 4. Commissioner Mouriquand commented this was a draft report which gave the Commission an opportunity to address issues and corrections. 5. Chairman Wilbur asked about additional language for Recommendation E. Commissioner Mouriquand commented language was needed to clarify and give direction to the developer regarding arrangements for a Native American monitor. She added there was no commitment by either Tribe to take on the responsibility. She suggested staff could contact the tribes to verify who would take the lead and work with the developer on whether the participant would be a Native American observer or a participant monitor. 6. Chairman Wilbur asked if a monitor required professional qualifications. Commissioner Mouriquand answered it meant an active monitor. The tribes deem who is qualified. An observer is someone sitting on the sidelines observing the monitors at work. 7. Commissioner Wright commented he concurred with Commissioner Mouriquand on Recommendation E and was disappointed in the number of typographical errors. He was also glad it was a draft and not a final copy. 8. Chairman Wilbur asked staff if they had enough information to revise Recommendation E. Staff replied they did. PACAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doe 005 3 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 9. Commissioner Mouriquand asked why the consultant had used a quarter -mile, instead of one -mile, radius. Staff replied there were 22 studies found within a quarter mile which made it very clear the area is highly sensitive. Commissioner Wright commented the Commission ought to be consistent in requesting a one -mile radius. Commissioner Mouriquand agreed and added the only exception would be if the report contained a very thorough and reasonable discussion supporting the reduction. 10. Chairman Wilbur asked if it would be appropriate to contact the developer regarding the Commission's concerns. Commissioner Mourqivand said the one -mile radius was a professional standard with most agencies. Commissioner Sharp asked if the consultant was aware of the City's parameters. Commissioner Mouriquand said that was their professional responsibility to check with each jurisdiction on their rules and regulations. 11. Chairman Wilbur said he would support a motion to send this report back to the consultant with suggestions. Planning Manager Les Johnson suggested staff take the Commission's suggestions back to the consultant and give them the opportunity to amend the document. It will be clearly conveyed this is to be a final report, with a full -mile radius, or justification for the quarter -mile. Chairman Wilbur said he wanted opportunity to review it, based on the quarter -mile justification, and completion of the City's parameters. 12. Commissioner Sharp brought up an issue regarding the Embassy Hotel, relative to trenching. He was concerned about the depth of trenching in sensitive areas, similar to the situation with the underground garage in the Embassy Hotels. He said this is a major project and was concerned about any underground work. Staff replied there would be no underground facilities, other than a loading dock which would not go below six or eight feet which is the approximate standard for an on -site retention basin. 006 P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doo 4 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 13. Chairman Wilbur asked the members of the Commission for recommendations. Commissioner Mouriquand suggested a motion that the Phase I report be remanded back to the consultant to address the Commission's concerns. Commissioner Wright seconded it. 14. Copies of Commissioner Mouriquand's comments were distributed for study. Chairman Wilbur asked the Commissioners if they had any comments. Commissioner Sharp said, according to his understanding, all the issues had been covered on this item. 15. There was no further comment. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriqand and Wright to remand the Cultural Resources Phase I Survey for the Costco project back to the developer with amendments as stated above. Unanimously approved. B. Cultural Resources Phase It Survey for the Costco Project Applicant: HDR Engineering, Inc., for Komar Development Archaeological Consultant: Harris Archaeological Consultants (Nina Harris, RPA) Location: South side of Highway 1 1 1, midway between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Sharp asked for clarification of "The Garden of Dreams." Staff replied it was a label. Commissioner Mouriquand said she did not find any discussion addressing the significance of this item. Commissioner Sharp asked where the label was. Commissioner Mouriquand said it would be archived in the City if it had been collected. 3. Commissioner Mouriquand said the consultant did the one - meter -by -one -meter test excavation unit for the historic sites, but only did shovel test pits for the prehistoric sites. This project sounds like it is in a dune environment and additional testing needs to be done. There is an established method for testing prehistoric dune sites and shovel test pits are too minimal to evaluate the significance of the site P:\CAROLVN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-O5.doc 00i 5 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 4. Chairman Wilbur had concerns about the discussion of time periods and the completeness of the report. Commissioner Mouriquand said the report did not answer the three basic questions: what was found, what does it mean, and what is to be done about it. The historic material was pretty good, but there was an inadequate amount of information in which to draw any conclusions. 5. Commissioner Wright said this report was unacceptable and not up to the caliber of the reports the Commission has come to expect. 6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand and Wright to request the field work be redone, testing below sterile, and to revise the Cultural Resources Phase It Survey for the Costco project incorporating the new data. Unanimously approved. C. Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Report: Applicant: Quadrant, Inc. Archaeological Consultant: ECORP Consulting, Inc. Location: South side of Avenue 58, west of Monroe Street 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Applicant, Savek Khatchadourian, owner of Quadrant, Beverly Hills, California, introduced himself and said he was available to answer any questions. 3. Commissioner Mouriquand commented the revised report was very disappointing and not up to professional standards. There were no photographs and there was no reference as to whether this was subject to Senate Bill 18. Staff replied this is a Tentative Tract Map only, and not subject to the requirements of Senate Bill 18. 4. Commissioner Wright reiterated his earlier comments on the professionalism of the types of reports the Commission had come to expect. This report did not meet those standards. 5. Commissioner Mouriquand said the standards the Commission was expecting were industry -wide standards;; not just those of P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doe � 008 6 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 the City, but as adopted by other cities, the State and Federal government as well. She added, in the Appendices, there was a hand-written copy which was interesting as a historical document, but there was no explanation or identifying label on it. In addition, the report was so minimal in text it did not provide enough information for a determination as to whether it would be usable to answer CEQA questions. She asked staff if the survey was negative. Staff replied it was. She suggested the Commission also require the improved language for this developer regarding the Native American monitor and staff might want to give the Augustine Band a call since they're the ones who responded. 6. Chairman Wilbur asked what the Commission could do to better communicate their standards to the consultants. Commissioner Mouriquand suggested the City send a letter to the applicant including recommendations on what the report is to contain. 7. Commissioner Wright said it is the consultant's responsibility to find out what is needed and follow those procedures. 8. Mr. Khatchadourian asked if his consultant responded to the issues that were outlined. Commissioner Mouriquand replied the report was not up to professional standards. Mr. Khatchadourian asked if there were standards given to consultants. Commissioner Mouriquand replied the; State Historic Preservation Office has a set of standards, called the ARMR format, which all professionals are aware of. 9. Mr. Khatchadourian said the consultant responded to the Commissions previous comments, but asked if the response was not adequate. Commissioner Mouriquand replied it was not enough response and asked staff if the report was comprehensive enough to answer CEQA questions. Staff replied it was, for the City's purposes, but could have included more details. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc C, f, 9 7 l 11�7 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 10. Mr. Khatchadourian asked if there was anything he could tell his consultant to make sure they return a more complete report. Commissioner Mouriquand replied it was up to the Commission to finish deliberating and come to a decision about what to do. 11. Chairman Wilbur said he thought they ought to use the ARMR format. 12. Commissioner Mouriquand suggested that the Commission conditionally approve this report with a letter to the consultant explaining the Commission's concerns and advising them no further reports will be accepted that don't meet the professional level of standard required by the ARMR report format and established City standards. 13. Chairman Wilbur asked what conditional acceptance meant. Commissioner Mouriquand agreed that was a good point. She revised her motion to accept the report provided a certified letter go out to the consultant as described above. 14. Mr. Khatchadourian said he would will call the consultant and make them aware of the problem. 15. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Mouriquand and Wright to adopt Minute Motion 2005-019 accepting the results of the Cultural Resources Survey Report, with condition as follows: That the Commission accept this report provided a certified letter be mailed to the consultant advising them of acceptable standards for the City of La Quinta and that the Commission will not accept any future reports of the quality of the current report. Unanimously approved. D. Paleontological Resources Assessment Report: Applicant: Coral Mountain Trails, LLC (Tom Cullinan) Archaeological Consultant: CRM Tech, Inc. Location: South side of Avenue 59, along Jefferson Street, Tentative Tract Map 33444. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc 010 8 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 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. Commissioners Wright and Mouriquand concurred with staff's recommendations. 3. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and Mouriquand to adopt Minute Motion 2005-020 to accept the report as submitted. Unanimously approved. E. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Applicant: Coral Mountain Trails, LLC (Tom Cullinan) Archaeological Consultant: CRM Tech, Inc. Location: South of Avenue 59, along Jefferson Street, Tentative Tract Map 33444 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. Chairman Wilbur asked for comments. Commissioner Sharp had a question about the size and description of the 80 acres. Applicant, Tom Cullinan expanded upon the description in the report. 3. Commissioner Mouriquand mentioned she had not received this report and asked if she could borrow a copy to check the exhibits. 4. Commissioner Wright said he concurred with staff's recommendation and amendment that we have guidelines for the Native American Indian information as stated in Recommendation D. 5. Commissioner Sharp asked about a previous find at the Quarry. Commissioner Mouriquand said they found some rock alignments and theorized they may have archaeo-astromy significance, or the bases of hunting blinds/screens. Commissioner Sharp asked if they were prehistoric. Commissioner Mouriquand replied they were. Commissioner Sharp commented there could be other finds on this location. Commissioner Mouriquand said there were a number of sites in this general area which were highly sensitive for prehistoric resources and there was a possibility of subsurface finds. P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-O5.doc to 11 9 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 6. It was discovered that none of the Commissioners received the Historical/Archaeological Resources Report. Copies were made and the Commissioners recessed to review the project. 7. The Commissioners recommended and discussed the possibility of continuing the item. Staff suggested they review it at this meeting as the project is currently being processed. 8. Commissioners Mouriquand and Wright were concerned as to whether the report could be read and digested in such a short period of time. Staff said there were only three isolates found. Commissioner Mouriquand said she understood the necessity to process this, but she didn't know what the isolates were. Staff said they were mentioned in the staff report. There was a piece of chip stone and two ceramic sherds. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if the sherds were painted. Commissioner Puente replied they were not. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if they were local sherds. 9. Commissioner Mouriquand commented on the GLO (Government Land Office), maps, transects, and Native American Scoping. Commissioner Wright deferred to Commissioner Mouriquand's recommendation. 10. Commissioner Mouriquand continued, saying this was a re- survey, originally done in 1994. Due to the age of the report, it had to be re -surveyed. 11. Commissioner Sharp commented on the rough terrain. Mr. Cullinan discussed the size of the parcel and added a 330 acre piece of sensitive land will not be developed. 12. Commissioner Mouriquand commented on the request by the Augustine and Morongo Bands for consultation if anything is unearthed during monitoring. Mr. Dunlap, a Gabrielano/Luseno/ Cahuilla representative recommended that both Native American and archaeological monitors be contacted to observe the earth moving activities. He recommended consultation with the Torres Martinez band to provide Native American monitoring. 13. Commissioner report. Mouriquand commended the applicant on the P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc I., 012 12 10 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 14. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Puente and Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2005-021 accepting the Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey Report as submitted. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. A flyer on "Prehistoric Occupation at Lavic Lake, California" was distributed to the Commissioners. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Mouriquand had three items she wanted to agendize for future discussion: 1), the removal of the Point Happy gate, 2). the destruction of the Point Happy tree, and 3). SB 18. She was under the impression the Commission had requested both be preserved. Staff would research it and get back to the Commission as the current staff was not directly involved in the project. B. Commissioner Wright said he and Commissioner Mouriquand both had concerns about the demolition of historic items. C. Commissioner Mouriquand said she understood there were some historic cottages, in the Cove, that had been demolished. Staff said they were unaware of any. They had been working with other Departments to avoid any such occurrence. D. Commissioner Mouriquand asked if staff could find out what happened with the Point Happy gate and tree that were removed. Commissioner Mouriquand said the gate and tree would be considered part of the historic landscape of that property. E. Commissioner Wright was concerned that the Commission spent a considerable amount of time on this project, to prevent this type of activity from occurring, only to end up with the historic items being removed anyway. Due to the City's rapid growth, he's concerned about protecting the remaining historicity of the City; whether it concerns historic landscape or structures. He commented on the accelerating worth of the property in the City. He is most concerned about the fact the land is of such great value in the Cove and the fact there are historic homes that may be demolished for the property value. He commented he would like to take the cultural resources manual drive around the City to see if those structures are still standing. He suggested others might want to do their own survey. P:\CAROLVN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc 013 11 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 F. Commissioner Puente suggested the developer had stored the gate to place it in another location. Commission Sharp also suggested it could be in storage since this was discussed with the developer. G. Commissioner Puente asked if the Commission could request follow- up, or final inspection on approved projects. H. Commissioner Mouriquand said the mitigation monitoring plan, which is part of the CEQA documentation, requires a plan with verification of compliance, by staff. The Commission can ask to see the verification or follow-up. Commissioner Puente asked if they could request the monitoring plan for Point Happy. Commissioner Mouriquand said the City would have that in their project case files. J. Commissioner Wright suggested it be put on the agenda for the next meeting. Another agenda item, he would like to include was some discussion on the mission and goals of this Commission now and in the future. K. Commissioner Mouriquand commented on the properties that had been documented on the State Registry and the City's responsibility to monitor those properties. L. Commissioner Wright asked about the status of the grant process. Staff was unable to provide the status, but would report back at the next meeting. Commissioner Mouriquand suggested the Community Development Director might want to give the Commission a briefing at the next meeting. M. Commissioner Wright said he was also very concerned about monitoring of the La Quinta Hotel and the status of the casitas N. Commissioner Mouriquand had some questions about Senate Bill 18, the Burton Law. This law mandates the cities and the counties in the State to comply with it since March 1 of this year. Basically, this is the law that mandates government -to -government consultation with local Indian bands whenever a city or county processes a General Plan Amendment or Specific Plan. Every city and county is supposed to have consultation protocols, confidentiality protocols, and figure out how to implement this and integrate it with their planning and CEQA review process. She had asked that the Commission be briefed on the status of the City's process and would like to see that item on the next agenda for discussion. She said she would like to see the staff P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc 014 12 Historic Preservation Commission September 15, 2005 reports for these consultants come through with comments on whether or not they are subject to Senate Bill 18 or not and the status of that process. This would be after the Phase I survey has been completed and something of significance found. She further discussed the fact that local tribes are very well informed on SB 18 and are holding the cities and counties accountable. Chairman Wilbur asked if it could hold up a project. Commissioner Mouriquand answered yes, since the item can not go to hearing until consultation is completed. 0. Chairman Wilbur asked if there was anyone available to brief the Commission on the aspects of SB 18. Commissioner Mouriquand said she had been teaching classes at UC Davis, and for a couple of the tribes. She said she didn't know if La Quinta had a protocol as yet. Staff replied the City is researching and looking into a protocol together. They expect to have a report at the next meeting. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright and Sharp to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next Regular Meeting to be held on October 20, 2005. This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was adjourned at 4.53 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by: Carolyn Walker Secretary P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 9-15-05.doc 015 13 DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 15, 2005 REVISED CULTURAL RESOURCES PHASE I SURVEY FOR THE COSTCO PROJECT SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1, MIDWAY BETWEEN JEFFERSON STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR KOMAR DEVELOPMENT HARRIS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS (NINA HARRIS, RPA) This Phase I Cultural Resources assessment was reviewed September 15, 2005 by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Revisions were requested to address items that the HPC felt were unacceptable. A revised assessment has been submitted for your review. Attached is the original staff report (Attachment 1). DISCUSSION: Harris Archaeological Consultants has prepared a revised Phase I survey to address concerns raised at the last Historic Preservation meeting (Attachment 2). Revisions include, but are not limited to a one mile records search, 1904 and 1941 USGS aerial maps, site photographs and checking for typographic errors. Staff has highlighted in yellow the significant portions of the report that have been revised. The revised report, as did the original report, concludes that since cultural resources were encountered during the course of the study a Phase II test program is necessary. A revised Phase II test program has been completed and is also under consideration at this meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005-, accepting the "Results of a Cultural Resources Phase I Survey Report for the Costco Project City of La Quinta, California", as prepared, subject to the following Conditions: A. A Phase II testing program shall be accepted by the Historic Preservation Commission with the Conditions of Approval added to the applicable Environmental Assessment. O16 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt costco archaeo rev ph Ldoc B. 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 the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. C. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. D. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. E. Monitoring crew shall include a Native American tribe member, assigned by the Ramona Band of Cahuilla, or their designee. Attachments: 1 . Staff report for the HPC meeting of September 15, 2005 2. Results of a Cultural Resources Phase I Survey Report for the Costco Project, City of La Quinta, California (Revised) Prepared by: `b�- �annrrti Stan Sawa, Principal Planner P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt costco archaeo rev ph Ldoc ATTACHMENT #1 DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 CULTURAL RESOURCES PHASE I SURVEY FOR THE COSTCO PROJECT SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, MIDWAY BETWEEN JEFFERSON STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR KOMAR DEVELOPMENT HARRIS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS (NINA HARRIS, RPA) The study area is a 26.8+ acre parcel located on the south side of Highway 111 between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road. The property is vacant, consisting of fill material on the east end and Aeolian sand dunes on the west. In the past it had been used for agricultural farming. A gas station, located in the City of Indio, and storm channel exists to the east with an abandoned trailer park to the west. The City is currently processing an application to allow a commercial project on the site, consisting of a Costco Wholesale Warehouse, and other commercial uses. A Phase I (survey level) Archaeological/Historical Resources Assessment has been completed for the property. The Assessment includes a record search and field reconnaissance of the property. This Assessment will be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application. DISCUSSION: An archaeological and historic records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center located at UC Riverside. Other sources consulted include the National Register of Historic Places, the California Historic Landmarks, California Points of Historic Interest (2004), and Office of Historic Preservation Database of Determinations of Eligibility (2004). Historic maps (USGS Indio 30' 1904, USGS La Quinta 7.5' 1959) and aerial maps (1938, 1949, and 1973) on file at the information center and in the Map Collection room at the Science Library on the UCR campus were also reviewed. The records search indicated the study area has not been surveyed and no cultural resources had been recorded on the site. Within the search radius, the records search 018 v( P:\Reports - HPC\2005\9-15-05\rpt costco archaeo ph Ldoc showed 22 previous surveys, resulting in 29 prehistoric sites or isolate artifacts. Of these, 17 are prehistoric, two multi -component, two isolate prehistoric artifacts, and one an isolate prehistoric isolate. The on -foot field survey was conducted by walking parallel north -south transects spaced 10-12 meters apart. As a result of this survey seven new archaeological sites (four historic and three prehistoric) and two prehistoric isolates were identified on the site. A request was made of the Native American Heritage Commission for a check of their Sacred Lands file. Additionally, letters requesting comments on the project were sent to local Indian tribes. To date, responses have been received from several of these tribes and are contained in the report. A request has been made that the monitoring crew include a Native American monitor. The report concludes that since cultural resources were encountered during the course of the study, a Phase II test program is necessary. It has been completed and is also under consideration at this meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- accepting the "Results of a Cultural Resources Phase I Survey Report for the Costco Project City of La Quinta, California", as prepared, subject to the following Conditions: A. A Phase II testing program shall be accepted by the Historic Preservation Commission with the Conditions of Approval added to the applicable Environmental Assessment. B. 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 the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. C. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. D. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 019 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\9-1 5-05\rpt costco archaeo ph I.doc E. Monitoring crew shall include a Native American tribe member. Attachment: 1. Results of a Cultural Resources Phase I Survey Report for the Costco Project, City of La Quinta, California Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner 020 J P:\Reports - HPC\2005\9-15-05\rpt costco archaeo ph Ldoc DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT CONSULTANT BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 20, 2005 REVISED CULTURAL RESOURCES PHASE II TEST FOR THE COSTCO PROJECT SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, MIDWAY BETWEEN JEFFERSON STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR KOMAR DEVELOPMENT HARRIS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS (NINA HARRIS, RPA) This Phase II Cultural Resources testing program was reviewed September 15, 2005 by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). Revisions were requested to address items that the HPC felt were unacceptable. A revised program has been submitted for your review. Attached is the original staff report (Attachment 1). Staff has highlighted in yellow the significant portions of the report that have been revised. DISCUSSION: Harris Archaeological Consultants has prepared a revised Phase II testing program to address concerns raised at the last Historic Preservation meeting (Attachment 2). Revisions include, but are not limited to, excavation of one meter by one meter test units in CA-RIV-7807, and -7809. Testing of CA-RIV-7807 resulted in 96 pieces of burned clay (daub) being recovered. No artifacts were found in CA-RIV-7809. The revised report, as did the original report, concludes that the sites are not significant or important under CEQA guidelines. However, due to the number of archaeological sites in the area, the report recommends monitoring during construction grading and trenching. Staff agrees and recommends the standard conditions be imposed. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Results of a Cultural Resources Phase II Test for the Costco Project City of La Quinta, California", as prepared by Harris Archaeological Consultants, subject to the following Conditions: 021 PAReports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt costco archaeo rev ph Il.doc A. 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 the City prior to issuance of first earth -moving or clearing permit. B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. C. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. Attachments: 1. Staff report for the HPC meeting of September 15, 2005 2. Results of a Cultural Resources Phase II Test Report for the Costco Project, City of La Quinta, California (Revised) Prepared by: 1 Cann � UA M. Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Olt PAReports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt costco archaeo rev ph II.doc r� 7 ATTACHMENT #1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 ITEM: CULTURAL RESOURCES PHASE II TEST FOR THE COSTCO PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, MIDWAY BETWEEN JEFFERSON STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD APPLICANT: HDR ENGINEERING, INC. FOR KOMAR DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT: HARRIS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS (NNINA HARRIS, RPA) BACKGROUND: This report presents the Phase II testing conclusions based on a Phase 'I survey recently completed for this property and also presented at this meeting. The study area is a 26.8+ acre parcel located on the south side of Highway 111 midway between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road. The property is vacant, consisting of fill material on the east end and Aeolian sand dunes on the west. In the past it had been used for agricultural farming. A gas station, located in the City of Indio and storm channel exists to the east with an abandoned trailer park to the west. The City is currently processing an application to allow a commercial project on the site, consisting of a Costco Wholesale Warehouse, and other commercial uses. A Phase I (survey level) Archaeological/Historical Resources Assessment has been completed for the property. The Assessment included a record search and field reconnaissance of the property. As a result of that survey seven new archaeological sites (four historic and three prehistoric) and two prehistoric isolates were identified on the site. This report documents the results of testing of these sites and isolates. DISCUSSION: Testing consisted of preparation of a research design, surface collection of diagnostic artifacts, and subsurface excavation. Historic archival review is provided documenting land ownership of the study area beginning in 1935. Testing of the historic and prehistoric sites resulted in no subsurface artifacts being found. The report concludes that the sites are not significant or important under CEQA 023 PAReports - HPC\2005\9-15-05\rpt costco archaeo ph Il.doc guidelines. However, due to the number of sites in the area, the report recommends monitoring during construction grading and trenching. Staff agrees and recommends the standard conditions be imposed. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Results of a Cultural Resources Phase II Test for the Costco Project, City of La Quinta California", as prepared by Harris Archaeological Consultants, subject to the following Conditions: A. 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 the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. C. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. Attachment: Results of a Cultural Resources Phase II Test Report for the Costco Project, City of La Quinta, California Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner 024 t P:\Reports - HPC\2005\9-15-05\rpt costco archaeo ph II.doc BI #C DATE: ITEM: I11014"1 I[G7IIF APPLICANT CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 20, 2005 PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 33801 WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET, 500 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 60 BLAKE JUMPER VANESSA MIRRO, APPLIED EARTH WORKS INC. The study area is a 2.58± acre site located on the west side of Madison Street about 500 feet north of Avenue 60. The property is a former farm residence located west of the Andalusia residential subdivision currently under development. Two abandoned 1 960's era structures, including the former farm residence, are located on the eastern portion of the site. To the north are 2.5 acre residential properties along Calle Conchita, one lot of which the applicant is concurrently proposing to also subdivide into eight lots. The City is currently processing Tentative Tract Map 33801, an application to allow an eight -lot single-family residential development. A Phase I (survey level) Cultural Resources Assessment has been completed for the property. The Cultural Assessment includes a record search and field survey of the property. This Assessment will be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application. DISCUSSION: An archaeological and historic records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center located at UC Riverside. The results of the records search indicated that 23 cultural resource surveys had been conducted previously within a one mile radius identifying 92 cultural resource sites, the majority of which were located to the southwest of the site. The current study area was included in three: of the previous surveys. However, no cultural resources had been recorded or identified within or immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the site. 0255 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc The on -foot field survey was conducted by walking parallel north -south transects spaced 10 to 15 meters apart. Ground visibility was moderate, ranging from 30 to 50 percent. The ground surface was reported to be moderately disturbed by the previous residence. The results of this survey were negative for prehistoric or historic resources. As noted above, the two abandoned structures are 1960's construction and therefore, not significant. On August 22 2005, a request was made of the Native American Heritage Commission for a check of their Sacred Lands inventory. Additionally, 12, letters requesting comments on the project were sent to area Indian tribes. To date, three responses were received from the contacted area tribes. These responses did riot have specific concerns but requested a qualified archaeologist be contacted if resources are discovered and that the tribes be notified of any discoveries. The Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians recommended that a monitor be located on site during ground moving activities. As they have cited that no significant archaeological resources have been identified in the immediate vicinity, Applied Earth Works, Inc. has recommended a qualified archaeologist be called only in the event that archaeological materials are uncovered during construction of the project. HPC policy requires monitoring in this part of the City regardless of whether artifacts were found during the Phase I survey. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Cultural Resources Survey Report for Tentative Tract 33801 in La Quinta, Riverside County, California", as prepared by Applied Earth Works, Inc. subject to the following conditions: A. 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 the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. Monitors shall include an Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians designee. B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the project. C. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 026 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc "' Attachment: 1 . Cultural Resources Survey Report for Tentative Tract 33801, a 2.58 Acre Parcel in La Quinta, Riverside County, California Prepared by: And w J. Mogensen, Associate Planner U'2 1 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc 3 C 9 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 20, 2005 ITEM: PALEONTOLOGICAL EVALUATION REPORT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR A 2.58 ACRE PARCEL LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET, 500' N. OF AVENUE 60 APPLICANT: BLAKE JUMPER CONSULTANT: VANESSA MIRRO, APPLIED EARTH WORKS INC. BACKGROUND: The study area is a 2.58 + acre site located on the west side of Madison Street about 500' feet north of Avenue 60. The property is a former farm residence located west of the Andalusia residential subdivision currently under development. Two abandoned 1960's era structures are located on the eastern portion of the site. To the north are 2.5 acre residential properties along Calle Conchita, one lot of which the applicant is concurrently proposing to also subdivide into 8 lots. This property is about 40 feet below mean sea level. A Paleontological Resources Assessment has been submitted for the property. The Assessment includes a record search of the property, but the applicants have not conducted a field survey. This Assessment, when accepted, will be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application (TT 33801). DISCUSSION: A paleontological records search for the property was conducted at the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) in Redlands and in published materials. The records search did not indicate paleontological localities have been found on the property, nor have any localities been found within a one -mile radius of the subject property. The consultant has provided a letter stating that no field survey has been conducted nor should it be required due to the fact that the entire area is considered highly sensitive and that, based upon the available information, a field survey would not affect the results of their recommendation. Staff has informed the applicant that a field survey is a standard policy requirement of the Historic Preservation Commission. 028 PAReports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 paleo Blake Jumper.doc The report concludes that excavation for the proposed site has a high potential to impact significant nonrenewable fossil resources located at depth if the fossiliferous Lake Cahuilla beds are encountered. Monitoring is recommended only for those undisturbed subsurface sediments where fossil, plant, or animal remains are found with no associated evidence of human activity or an archaeological context. The Historic Preservation Commissions policy has been to require monitoring of the entire site during its rough grading as well as trenching if the initial field survey found any fossil mollusk shells on the surface. No field survey has been conducted for this project, but the consultant has stated the site has a high potential for nonrenewable fossil resources being found and recommends monitoring of earth -moving activities. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan for a 2.58 acre Parcel City of La Quinta Riverside County, California", as prepared and recommended by Applied Earth Works, Inc. and subject to the following conditions: 1 . Prior to groundbreaking, a field survey shall be conducted by the applicant in order to identify and document potential surface fossiliferous resources. A report of findings from the field survey shall be transmitted to Community Development Department and shall be provided to site monitors. 2. On- and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and grading in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. The monitor shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Proof that a monitor has been retained shall be given to City prior to issuance of first earth - moving permit, or before any clearing of the site is begun. 3. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. 4. A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be submitted to the City prior to the first occupancy of a residence being granted by the City. The report shall include pertinent discussions of the significance of all recovered resources where appropriate. The report and inventory, when submitted will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources. 029 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 paleo Blake Jumper.doc 5. Collected resources and related reports, etc. shall be given to the City for curation. Packaging of resources, reports, etc. shall comply with standards commonly used in the paleontological industry. Attachments: 1. Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan for a 2.58 Acre Parcel, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California 2. Letter regarding paleontological investigation for Tracts 33801 and 33802 Prepared by: JeAnw J. Mogensen, iate Planner 030 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33801 paleo Blake Jumper.doc r, j 10/10/2005 09:15 _ 909-766-0020 APPLIED EARTHWORKS I ATTACHMENT #2 3292 E. FIorMa Avenue Sake A Ha mat. CA 92644-4941 (951) 7W2000 FAX (951) IWW20 10 October 2005 Andrew J. Mogensen Associate Planner City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quints, CA 92247-1504 Re: Paleontological Investigations for Tracts 338012 and 33802 Dear Mr. Mogensen, As per our conversation earlier today, you inquired about San Bernardino County Museum's (SBCM) decision to forgo a field survey of Tracts 33801 and 33802. Eric Scott, Curator of Paleontology for the SBCM, author of the reports submitted for the proposed project, said that despite whether fossils appear on the surface of the proposed tracts, the entire area is considered to be highly sensitive for fossil resources based on existing geologic data for the Project area, and that their recommendation would be that a qualified paleontological monitor be present dining ground - disturbing activities regardless of the results of a field survey. Existing studies of the project area indicate that Quaternary alluvium overlies ancient Lake Cabuilla sediments, which have high potential to contain significant nonrenewable fossil resources. A pedestrian survey would yield no additional information, nor change their recommendation for the project. Further, no fossil remains were encountered during Applied EarthWorks (fE) pedestrian survey of the two tracts. The freshwater shell observed on the ground surface during tE's survey is associated with the more recent stands (ca. 700-500 years B.P.) of Lake Cabuilla, and would not be considered to be a paleontological resource. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions regarding this matter. SSincerely,CQ h- 4 Vanessa A. Mirro Associate Archaeologist Cc. Melinda Home 11, 031 •27 DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 20, 2005 PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR PROPOESED TENTATIVE TRACT 33802 CALLE CONCHITA AND MADISON STREET, ABOUT 1000 FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 60 BLAKE JUMPER VANESSA MIRRO, APPLIED EARTH WORKS INC. The study area is a 2.66± acre site located north of Avenue 60, west of Madison Street along Calle Conchita, within existing recorded Tract No. 3686. The vacant property is located adjacent to fallow agricultural land to the north, a residence to the west, a citrus orchard to the south, and across Madison Street from the Andalusia residential subdivision currently under development, located to the east. To the south is 2.5 acre tentative tract which the applicant is concurrently proposing to also subdivide into 8 lots. The City is currently processing Tentative Tract Map 33802, an application to allow an 8 lot single-family residential development. A Phase I (survey level) Cultural Resources Assessment has been completed for the property. The Assessment includes a record search and field survey of the property. This Assessment will be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application. DISCUSSION: An archaeological and historic records search for the property was conducted at the Eastern Information Center located at UC Riverside. The results of the records search indicated that 23 cultural resource surveys had been conducted previously within a one mile radius identifying 92 cultural resource properties, the majority of which were located to the southwest of the site. The current study area was included in three of the previous surveys. However, no cultural resources had been recorded or identified within or immediately adjacent to the boundaries of the site. The on -foot field survey was conducted by walking parallel north -south transects spaced 10 to 15 meters apart. Ground visibility was poor, ranging from 12 to 15 032 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33802 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc percent. The ground surface was overgrown with non-native grasses, weeds, and groundcover. The ground surface was reported to be "highly disturbed" and was reportedly the location of an unofficial dump site. The results of this survey were negative for prehistoric or historic resources. On August 22 2005, a request was made of the Native American Heritage Commission for a check of their Sacred Lands inventory. Additionally, 12 letters requesting comments on the project were sent to area Indian tribes. To date, three responses were received from the contacted area tribes. These responses did not have specific concerns but requested a qualified archaeologist be contacted if resources are discovered and that the tribes be notified of any discoveries. The Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians recommended that a monitor be located on site during ground moving activities. As they have cited that no significant archaeological resources have been identified in the immediate vicinity, Applied Earth Works, Inc. has recommended a qualified archaeologist be called only in the event that archaeological materials are uncovered during construction of the project. HPC policy requires monitoring in this part of the City regardless of whether artifacts were found during the Phase I survey. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Cultural Resources Survey Re:port for Tentative Tract 33801 in La Quinta Riverside County, California", as prepared by Applied Earth Works, Inc. subject to the following conditions: A. 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 the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. Monitors shall include an Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians designee. B. The final report on the monitoring shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the project. C. Collected archaeological 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 Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 033 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33802 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc (' -t Attachment: Cultural Resources Survey Report for Tentative Tract 33801, a 2.58 Acre Parcel in La Quinta, Riverside County, California Prepared by: Andrew J. Mogensen, Associate Planner 034 3 PAReports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33802 ph 1 archaeo Blake Jumper.doc BI #F DATE: ITEM: LOCATION: APPLICANT: CONSULTANT: BACKGROUND: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 20, 2005 PALEONTOLOGICAL EVALUATION REPORT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR A 2.66 ACRE PARCEL CALLE CONCHITA AND MADISON STREET, ABOUT 1000' FEET NORTH OF AVENUE 60 BLAKE JUMPER VANESSA MIRRO, APPLIED EARTH WORKS INC. The study area is a 2.66± acre site located north of Avenue 60, west of Madison Street along Calle Conchita, within existing recorded Tract No. 3686. The property is a former farm residence located west of the Andalusia residential subdivision currently under development. To the south is a 2.5 acre tentative tract which the applicant is concurrently proposing to also subdivide into 8 lots. This property is about 40 feet below mean sea level. A Paleontological Resources Assessment has been submitted for the property, but the applicants have not conducted a field survey. The Assessment includes a record search of the property. This Assessment, when accepted, will be part of the environmental review required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project application ITT 33802)• DISCUSSION: A paleontological records search for the property was conducted at the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) in Redlands and in published materials. The records search did not indicate paleontological localities have been found on the property, nor have any localities been found within a one -mile radius of the subject property. The consultant has provided a letter stating that no field survey has been conducted nor should it be required due to the fact that the entire area is considered highly sensitive and that, based upon the available information, a field survey would not affect the results of their recommendation. Staff has informed the applicant that a field survey is a standard policy requirement of the Historic Preservation Commission. 035 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33802 paleo Blake Jumper.doc The report concludes that excavation for the proposed site has a high potential to impact significant nonrenewable fossil resources located at depth if the fossiliferous Lake Cahuilla beds are encountered. Monitoring is recommended only for those undisturbed subsurface sediments where fossil, plant, or animal remains are found with no associated evidence of human activity or an archaeological context. The Historic Preservation Commissions policy has been to require monitoring of the entire site during its rough grading as well as trenching if the initial field survey found any fossil mollusk shells on the surface. No field survey has been conducted for this project, but the consultant has stated the site has a high potential for nonrenewable fossil resources being found and recommends monitoring of earth -moving activities. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2005- , accepting the "Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan for a 2.66 acre Parcel, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California", as prepared and recommended by Applied Earth Works, Inc. and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to groundbreaking, a field survey shall be conducted by the applicant in order to identify and document potential surface fossiliferous resources. A report of findings from the field survey shall be transmitted to Community Development Department and shall be provided to site monitors. 2. On- and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and grading in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources shall be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. The monitor shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Proof that a monitor has been retained shall be given to City prior to issuance of first earth - moving permit, or before any clearing of the site is begun. 3. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. 4. A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of specimens shall be submitted to the City prior to the first occupancy of a residence being granted by the City. The report shall include pertinent discussions of the significance of all recovered resources where appropriate. The report and inventory, when submitted will signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources. 036 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\ I 0-20-05\rpt tt 33802 paleo Blake Jumper.doc 5. Collected resources and related reports, etc. shall be given to the City for curation. Packaging of resources, reports, etc. shall comply with standards commonly used in the paleontological industry. Attachments: 1. Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan for a 2.58 Acre Parcel, City of La Quinta, Riverside County, California 2. Letter regarding paleontological investigation for Tracts 33801 and 33802 Prepared by: drew J. Mogense Associate Planner .. 0 3 i P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt tt 33802 paleo Blake Jumper.doc 10/10/2005 09:15 909-766-0020 APPLIED EARTHWORKS I ATTACHMENT #2 9292 E. FWdde Avenue Sub A Hemet, CA 025e4.4941 (951) 7e6-2999 FAX (951) IWW20 10 October 2005 Andrew J. Mogensen Associate Planner City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quints, CA 92247-1504 Re: Paleontological Investigations for Tracts 338012 and 33802 Dear Mr. Mogensen, As per our conversation earlier today, you inquired about San Bernardino County Museum's (SBCM) decision to forgo a field survey of Tracts 33801 and 33802. Eric Scott, Curator of Paleontology for the SBCM, author of the reports submitted for the proposed project, said that despite whether fossils appear on the surface of the proposed tracts, the entire area is considered to be highly sensitive for fossil resources based on existing geologic data for the Project area, and that their recommendation would be that a qualified paleontological monitor be present during ground - disturbing activities regardless of the results of a field survey. Existing studies of the project area indicate that Quaternary alluvium overlies ancient Lake Cahuilla sediments, which have high potential to contain significant nonrenewable fossil resources. A pedestrian survey would yield no additional information, nor change their recommendation for the project. Further, no fossil remains were encountered during Applied EarthWorks (fE) pedestrian survey of the two tracts. The freshwater shell observed on the ground surface during Hs survey is associated with the more recent stands (ca. 700-500 years B.P.) of Lake Cahuilla, and would not be considered to be a paleontological resource. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Vanessa A. Mirro Associate Archaeologist Cc. Melinda Home 11.11 038 1 BI #G HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 20, 2005 ITEM: BUDGET ALLOCATIONS FOR UPDATING HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY BACKGROUND: Presently the City's Budget includes $25,000 for updating of the Historic Property survey. Staff anticipates beginning preparation of a Request for Proposals in the next 30 days. The following is an outline of the Request for Proposal we anticipate using: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS La Quinta City-wide Resources Survey 1. PROJECT PARAMETERS 2. SCOPE OF WORK 3. TIMELINE �0519Za1:8111 5. PAYMENT SCHEDULE 6. MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PROPOSAL 7. CONTACT INFORMATION Prepared by: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner 039 P:\Reports - HPC\2005\10-20-05\rpt budget for survey.doc WRITTEN MATERIAL 040 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 while t ey're finishing up the monitoring report. If it is the Com fission's desire we would like to maintain that protocol less directed otherwise. The only difference being it wi be submitted to the Commission instead of the Commu ity Development Department for review 64. Consultant M enna stated if the monitoring ontains a negative findin the report will be done im ediately. It would only bed layed if artifact or, site f ms need to be prepared. 65. Planning Manager rci added th report also requested the balance of the s andard co ditions be required such as curation. 66. Consultant McKenna as ed what should happen to any artifacts, if f/MojqTuandCre 67. Chairperson lied the City has adopted Curation Poity will determine what to do with the arti 68. Consul nt McKenna added the�mmission can make the cision whether or not any h toric remains need to be ept or de -accessioned. She th n asked if a draft of e Amended Phase I was needed by the next meeting. Staff replied the Commission would need to discuss that and coordinate with staff. 69. Planning Manager Orci said there was one other item to discuss and that was the gate issue. Staff was recommending they work with the applicant to locate the gate in an appropriate location, under the Commission's direction. 70. Chairperson Mouriquand stated the Commission wanted to leave the gate in situ and re -design the entryway to accommodate the gate. 041 11 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 71. Applicant Wilkerson asked to address this issue. He showed a picture of the gate in question and asked to read into the record a copy of the letter received from Christopher Kiernan (copy attached). He added, as a backdrop to this letter, the name Point Happy was probably only known by a few people in this whole Valley. Madison Development re -invented the name Point Happy, kept and promoted the Point Happy name as an area that is of interest for tourists to come by and see. When they purchased the Point Happy Ranch they understood the gate was not old and was new. 'They appreciated the history of the site as well as the name and decided to retain the history in the name of the development - The Estates at Point Happy Ranch. They have consistently promoted the idea of Point Happy being a place that occurred in time and want people to know that when they buy a home here, shop, or eat at the Point Happy Commercial Center, this is part of the history of this area. The street names chosen, Clark Court, Bradshaw Trail, and Heritage Way continue this heritage. He asked why they had to preserve a gate and look that wasn't even in existence until 1977. He felt it was enough to maintain the area with "Point Happy Ranch" included in the name and to have the new gate state that. He did not wish to have an wooden sign at the entry. He added, in respect to the Kiernan's, they offered to put the gate in the retention pond, which is inside and on private streets. They just don't feel they should be held to a guideline that has no bearing in history regarding that specific gate. 72. Chairperson Mouriquand replied there is a permit indicating whether the gate is of a historic resource. If not, that may need to be corrected. In regards to the Point Happy Ranch, the name is widely known. If the developer has evidence this is not a historic gate then the Commission will be happy to look at the letter. The Commission would then have to do further research to see if this is gate does need to be preserved in situ. 73. Consultant McKenna stated she thought the oral histories and photographs would clarify this matter. 042 12 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 74. Applicant Wilkerson said they have tried to promote the name of Point Happy. They would like to offer a compromise in keeping with the theme that we are trying to produce here. First of all, the gates are rusted out and the entrance is small. We have worked on an idea with Ron Gregory, to reproduce a section of the gate to make it bigger, more elaborate, but basically the same look, to cover the entire entrance. The gates would be the same type of gates. As you drive through they would open one on each side. We would put the name Point Happy Ranch in the gate. I don't think a wood painted sign is the look they want. A plaque would be placed on the gate stating it is a historic location. 75. Commissioner Wright said if the existing gate was produced, or built, in the 70's, he didn't think anybody on the Commission would have a problem with what was suggested. If the gate was made in 1977 there's no reason to keep it in the front area as it is not historic. 76. Applicant Wilkerson suggested they obtain an affidavit from Mark Kiernan as to the year it was built. 77. Commissioner Wright replied he knew Chris Kiernan and he was a good source of information. The Commission, however, would like to go back and check the oral history as well as look at the early photographs of the property. 78. Consultant McKenna said it may be the gate is actually a replication of something that was gone for awhile and was brought back. 79. Chairperson Mouriquand stated the County started issuing building permits in 1950, and a building permit may have been issued for the gate's construction. She suggested looking at the County's building permit archive. 043 13 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 80. Consultant McKenna said she usually did more photography than necessary for her reports, and they would be available to be archived. All of the reports will be sent to the Historical Society and the Information Center. All the criteria for compliance with the Historical Society and the City will be met. One of the main goals of the interviews will be to verify what the physical remains on the site represent, including the gate. 81. Commissioner Wright stated he liked the idea of keeping the Point Happy concept alive, but the gate did not need to be included if it was not historic. 82, Commissioner Wilbur stated the information on the gate should be validated by one, or two other sources. If the gate is not historic, then there should be some other symbolic representation of the Point Happy idea. 83. The applicant's representative Ed Alderson, asked if the Commission would like to see the plan when it is available. 84. Commissioner Wright said they would. He added the gate does not have to be replicated exactly. He felt the project should retain the same type of feeling the property had in the 1920's. 85. Applicant Wilkerson agreed that was the same type of atmosphere they were trying to keep. 86. Commissioner Sharp said he saw no artistic value in the current gate. He was concerned about the location of the existing gate in relation to what was planned inside. He suggested they make a gate that says Point Happy Ranch in the Spanish or Tuscan style, possible with some tiles on it. 87. Commissioner Puente said she agreed they should find out about the date of the gate before making a decision. 88. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested they table the issue of the gate until they have further information. G'q� 14 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 89. Consultant McKenna said she would make sure the research is included in the amended report after she researches the permits. 90. Planning Manager Orci suggested the applicant research the data as soon as possible. If this is not an original gate or does not have significant historical value the Commission may want to direct staff to work with the applicant to replicate the gate entry unless it is of historical significance. The matter will then be brought back to the Commission for review. 91. Chairperson Mouriquand and Commissioner Wright concurred. 92. Applicant Wilkerson asked if he could go ahead and process the final map. 93. Chairperson Mouriquand replied the Commission was seeking additional substantiation on whether the gate is historic before proceeding. 94. Consultant McKenna said she would check the building permits which would show the approved design and the date it was approved. She will provide the information as soon as it is obtained to help staff schedule a meeting to discuss the matter further. 95. Applicant Wilkerson commented the gate was never useable as an entrance. 96. Chairperson Mouriquand replied the Commission was not requesting that option. The Commission's concern was with the historicity of the gate. The concern was retaining it in situ. It would not be a functional gate, but to move it to the back part of the property would deny the public the opportunity to continue to view this historic resource. The Commission is suggesting the gate component itself be incorporated into a perimeter wall treatment. 97. Commissioner Wright added the request was based on the fact the gate was historic. 045 15 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 98. Planning Manager Orci commented for the purposes of CEQA the gates need to be preserved on site, with no specification as to where. The Commission can add additional information indicating it is a significant historical resource with the location to be decided at a later date. 99. Chairperson Mouriquand stated the important aspect was the documentation because, in the future, the gate may be considered historic. It has been documented and that is what needs to be done. However, if it is documented as a historic gate, the Commission would like the opportunity to confirm, or refute, that and have the opportunity to reconsider what is to be done with it. The County records should provide adequate evidence of when the gate was built. 100. Applicant Wilkerson asked if the gate has some historic significance would it be acceptable to incorporate the gate into the boundary fence for public view. And if it isn't, would they have to do anything except what has been previously discussed. He wanted to know if there was any reason to hold up getting a final map, considering the agreements discussed. 101. Chairperson Mouriquand replied it shouldn't hold up getting a final map as long as the design accommodates preservation in situ, should that be the determination. 102. Applicant Wilkerson stated that was fine as long as the gate was moved. 103. Chairperson Mouriquand replied in situ meant "in place"; without moving it. There seems to be no reason why the project cannot be re -designed to accommodate that request. 104. Applicant Wilkerson replied they felt the historic tree was of more significance than anything else. They eliminated two lots to retain the tree. The gate could be moved down, but there would still be an entrance that preserves the tree. 046 16 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 105. Chairperson Mouriquand replied it may not be structurally feasible to move the gate. It might be wiser, in the long run, to leave it where it is. 106. Consultant McKenna commented she would need a day or two with the County records. On the off chance the gate was built without a permit she would rely on other information from the Historical Society or photos that: can be dated. She commented that maybe the Kiernan's had photos of the property when they bought it that showed the gate wasn't there. That would help verify the dates. 107. Planning Manager Orci summarized the discussion into the following points: 1. if the gate is not of significant historical value, staff is directed to work with the applicant to design a gate similar to the present gate; 2. to modify the CEQA document indicating the gate is of no significant value; and, 3. if the gate is historical, the CEQA document will not be altered and will indicate: the gate is to remain on site. He asked if that was sufficient for CEQA documentation purposes. 108. Chairperson Mouriquand said it was fine for CEQA purposes, but added as far as what staff was asking, if the discussion in the Environmental Assessment was going to be adequate, because it didn't state in situ, it should designate preservation on site which could be anywhere in the project. She asked the Commissioners if they wanted language to state specifically "in situ". 109. Commissioner Wright said he was not comfortable with the phrase "on site". It is too vague. He said the Commission would need to discuss the location of the gate if it is historic. He did not wish to have it placed in the common area. 110. Commissioner Puente asked if the matter could be discussed after the revised report was received. 111. Commissioner Wright commented on the way the gate at Tradition was handled. The gate was not moved. The road was moved and documented historically. 047 17 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 112. Chairperson Mouriquand said there was not enough information to conclude the CEQA document and go forward. These documents could not be completed until Ms. McKenna could determine the date the gate was built. 113. Planning Manager Orci stated this project would then be delayed because the CEQA finding had not been adequately addressed. 114. Consultant McKenna suggested this might be answered as soon as she checks the County records. 115. Commissioner Wright added Ms. McKenna could deal with staff if the gate is not historical. There is no reason to come back to the Commission. 116. Consultant McKenna asked if there was no permit she would advise staff and let them know she would need more time to investigate the date the gate was constructed. 117. Planning Manager Orci stated Ms. McKenna could work with staff. He then re -stated the Commission's direction that the project can move forward if the gate is not historical, delete that item from the CEQA document: and move the project forward. If it is found it is of historical significance it will be brought back to the Commission. 118. Applicant Wilkerson thanked the Commission. 123. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2003-012 accepting the Point Happy Ranch Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment with added conditions as follows: a The applicant shall provide an Addendum to the Phase I report which includes additional information on trails and any other significant historical aspect of the property. b. The Paleontological Consultant shall concurrently continue the technical report on eligibility criteria for the National Register. 048 18 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 16, 2003 c. The Phase I Report shall be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. d. The technical report shall be considered independently by the Historic Preservation Commission at a future date. e. 1). If the gate is not of significant historical value, staff is directed to work with the applicant to design a gate similar to the present gate; 2). To modify the CEQA document indicating the gate is of no significant value; and, 3). If the gate is historical, the CEQA document will not be altered and will indicate the gate is to remain on site. Unanimously approved. B. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the City's SilverRock Ranch 1. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairperson Mouriquand asked if the Kennedy House had been documented before it was torn down. 3. Staff replied it had not been since it was not considered historic. 4. Commissioner Wright commented the Kennedy house had been vandalized and had been in very poor condition. There was nothing left that was salvageable. 5. Chairperson Mouriquand said the house had been empty for years, but it would have been to nice to have had the property documented prior to demolition. Staff asked why a non -historic building would be documented. 6. Chairperson Mouriquand stated that there are times vvhen buildings have cultural value without being 50 years old. Sometimes they provide information for settlement patterns, or contribute to the history of the area, etc. 7. Commissioner Wright commented the Commission would have preferred photographs be taken of the site before demolition. 049 19 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting November 20, 2003 d. Replace cultural information from Los Angeles with appropriate cultural discussion erived from local sources. e Include qualifications o he person doing survey (Corrina Hinkins) f. Request consults include a paleontological letter from the San 90finardino County Museum. g. ange c4Wural setting to reflect appropriate C chell alley Native American occupation. Unanimousf`j approved. VI. CORRESPONDENgE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL A. Infor tion on the Cali%rnia Preservation Conference was dis ibuted. Discussion followed as to who would be able to V. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Update on Point Happy Ranch. Staff explained the gate was determined to be non -historic. The applicant is: 1►. desiclning gates similar to those currently in place; 2). working with the Historical Society on the oral history; 31. Jeanette McKenna is working on the National Register eligibility. The project recently went before the City Council and was continued due to circulation concerns. VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Sharp to adjourn this Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission to the next Regular Meeting to be held on December 18, 2003. This meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission was adjourned at 3:53 p.m. Unanimously approved. Submitted by, Carolyn Walker Secretary P:\CAROLYN\Hist Pres Com\HPC 11-20-03.doc r© Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 3. Chairperson Mouriquand Harry Quinn doing the quali'tied Paleontologist. commented he would probably have monitoring as Mr. Hogan was riot a 4. Commi sioner Wilbur asked what the protocol w for Interim Phase II eports from staff's experience. Staff plied they have been sub itted in the past and accepted. n this case, since the results id not reveal artifacts the ould be comfortable accepting th Interim Report. If anyt ng is found, or the status changes, it wo Id be brought bac o the Commission. 5. Commissioner S rp was oncernecl about what would be found under the to aris but was happy the project would be monitored. icommmendati id they would have a monitor and contact the ties as necessary. 6. Chairpersond no further comments and agreed with staff'ss. 7. It was moved and seconde by Commissioners Puente and Shar to adopt Minute Motion 04-010 accepting the Interim P se II Archaeological Test Program for Tentative Tract No. 2201, as prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group, subject to conditions. Unanimously approved. E. A Cultural Resources Investigation of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area (Tentative Tract Map 31348) Applicant: Madison Development Archaeological Consultant: McKenna, et al Location: 46-201 Washington Street (located on the west side of Washington Street, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 1 1 1) 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairperson Mouriquand stated the report is a nice contribution to the history of La Quinta. n 51 10 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 3. Archaeological Consultant Jeanette A. McKenna was present and pointed out the photo on the cover of the report was that of Mrs. Louise Neeley. 4. Commissioner Wilbur said he knew this report would go to the Library and Historic Museum, but he suggested a copy be given to each of the City Council members to demonstrate what can be done. Chairperson Mouriquand commented there was a large expense attached to producing reports this detailed. She suggested one copy be presented at a Council meeting to let them know it would be filed in the Community Development Department for their review. Staff replied there was protocol on how the Council was informed of certain matters. They are included in a weekly update. Chairperson Mouriquand agreed it would save printing expenses and would be a more efficient way to notify the Council. 5. Commissioner Sharp thanked the Archaeologist for such a nice scholarly piece of work. He thought the work was so well done a copy should go to the Chamber of Commerce and the La Quinta Hotel. It was a historical document and should be shared. Chairperson Mouriquand said a copy should be put in the Library. 6. Ms. McKenna said the Historical Society might be able: to use this report, possibly as a fund raiser. She added, one: of her employees was in graduate school and would be using portions of this report in her thesis. Commissioner Sharp asked if the Commission would be able to obtain copies of that report. Ms. McKenna replied it would be possible. She clarified the research was being done on Mrs. Neeley's family and their impact on the history of the Valley. She said their family history was very amazing the more you looked into it. She said you're very impressed when you read the transcripts, hear her speak about her parents, her grandparents, where they came from, what they did, how they got here, and how quickly they came from living in tents, to a generation later, all being college graduates. 052 11 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 7. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested Council be informed the report will become part of a thesis. The message to Council should be there is academic value in doing these kinds of investigations rather than just to obtain building perrnits and entitlements for projects. Efforts of this nature can lead to valuable contributions to local history and academic study. The City should be proud of, and encourage more of this activity and possibly look into promoting a scholarship fund. It's too bad there isn't a copy of the 1997 Revisions to the Draft Context Statement because a lot of those things have been addressed and cleaned up and I think the archaeologists are using the 1996 version. However, this is an outstanding effort and a lot of work went into this. She thanked Ms. McKenna and her staff. 8. Ms. McKenna said a copy of the video was given to staff, but she has the original, if additional copies needed to be made. She also commented it was amazing the information that could be obtained when the General Land Office and the County records were used. 9. Commissioner Sharp commented there had previously been a movement in the area, about a City of La Quinta Pageant. He said he could see a Pageant being produced from this historical information. 10. Chairperson Mouriquand asked the Commission to recall the reason this report was commissioned. The previous reports did not go far enough, and the Commission requested a more detailed effort be done. That was accomplished in this document. She asked if the Commission and staff felt this property had been adequately documented. Staff replied there had been two efforts. One was to document all that was possible, including Mrs. Neeley's information, and the other was to consider the possibility of inclusion in the Register. Chairperson Mouriquand asked for Ms. Mc;Kenna's recommendations as to where the Commission needed to go next. 11 [5 3 12 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 11. Ms. McKenna replied monitoring would have to continue and commented on the following process to nominate a site for the State Register. The Ranch meets the minimum requirements of criteria 1, 2 and the potential for 4. Criteria 3 was discounted which was the architecture, because of the deterioration of the buildings, the addition of things that had nothing to do with Point Happy and the significant removal of elements to Point Happy to where you had such a small fraction left it was really hard to say it was representative of what Point Happy and the Clark years would have represented. 12. Staff asked Ms. McKenna to explain the four criteria to the Commission. Ms. McKenna stated Criterias 1 and 2 are the associations with events and persons and gave examples of people and events that fit the criteria. She said Criteria 4 is sort of a catchall which allows for the potential of buried resources and the ability to do additional research. She then gave examples of several local family histories which would help qualify the project for Criteria 4. She said the project met three of the four criteria for the California Register of Historic Resources. It would take a stronger case to qualify for the National Register. She didn't think it would qualify unless something really significant came up during the monitoring, but this was certainly a California Historic Landmark. 13. Staff commented the next step would be to go through the nomination process. The applicant and the applicant's representative could help in doing this as we would need to get the primary record from them as well as a letter from this Commission and the balance of documentation for nomination. Staff asked if that was the Commission's wishes. The Commissioners unanimously agreed. 14. Commissioner Sharp asked why the Duponts were not included in the report. Ms. McKenna replied she did not go into a lot of detail because she was zeroing in on this particular property. She did the same thing with Miss Marble. They had a lot of information, but had to draw the line as to where they were going to limit the documentation. Mrs. Neeley and her oral history made reference to all the movie people. 154 13 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 15. Chairperson Mouriquand said there was approximately three hours of video and she would like to see it. She mentioned possibly the rest of the Commissioners, as well as Council, might like to see it. Staff said they were working out some form of accountability as to who had the video, possibly a check out system. They suggested another appropriate system would be to check with the City Clerk to see if they had any measure, or method to duplicate the video to perhaps a DVD or CD Rom. Staff will look into it and get back to the Commission. 16. Ms. McKenna made a comment about their attempts to add some interest, to the video, by pretending they were Huell Howser. This, however, did make an honest case for the Commission to ask Mr. Howser to come back and re -do the interview. If he were to interview Mrs. Neeley, about early La Quinta, it would be a good story. She suggested a copy of the tape be sent to him. 17. Chairperson Mouriquand suggested, in lieu of checking out the videos, possibly a movie night could be planned for all the Commissioners to see it. They could then decide how to proceed as far as promoting and designating the report and video. She said staff could have copies made and devise a check out system as well as archive some copies. Duplicate copies could be provided to the Library and other appropriate places. 18. Ms. McKenna said they spliced together the original cassettes to make the copy they have now. She suggested the original could be made available if staff had means of burning a CD. 19. Applicant's representative, Ed Alderson asked how many copies were made. Ms. McKenna replied an original and three copies, two of which were given to the City, and one to Ms. Neeley. 20. Staff said they would check to find out what is available on the City's media system. 055 14 Historic Preservation Commission May 20, 2004 21. Staff said they would bring back an outline, with as much information as possible, on the nomination procedures for a State Historic Landmark. They were unsure if the Council needed to provide a letter, but would check on this. Chairperson Mouriquand said the Commission had SHPO powers, as a CLG, and could write the letter. Staff stated they would begin putting the primary records together and bring the information back to the Commission. Ms. McKenna asked if the applicant could gain any tax credit through the Mills act. Chairperson Mouriquand answered there were no Mills Act contracts in place in La Quinta, but it needs to come back for discussion as the project might qualify. Possibly staff could look into this and forward the information to the property owner so they could see how this would benefit them because it required property owner's authorization to proceed. It would definitely be to the owner's advantage for property taxes. 22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilbur and Sharp to adopt Minute Motion 2004-011 accepting the Cultural Resources Investigation of the Point Happy Ranch Project Area as submitted. The Commission also directed staff to seek the nomination for California Historic Landmark for the Point Happy Ranch Site. Unanimously approved with Commissioners Puente and Wright being absent. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Sharp statehe was cc of Gary Resvaloso's prese tation. 1 anything further and wanted \to kn upcoming presentation. Staff repli contacts with Mr. Resvaloso's�o ice Chairperson Mouriquar sriggeste Resvaloso inviting him to make his meeting. She added the Commission icer d about the rescheduling i Commission had not heard the status of Mr. Resvaloso's d they had made numerous but had nothing definite yet. staff from the Augustine; Santa Rosa, and future meeting. send a letter to Mr. antation at an upcoming also invite representatives )azon Bands to attend a 15 0 C 5