Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAAC Min 1996-01-17 CITY OF SEAL BEACH '-" ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMl\fiTIEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1996 I. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chairman Fitzpatrick called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M. ll. ROLL CALL Present: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Price, Unatin (5:09 P.M.), Willey, and Yearn Absent: Staff Present: Member Frietze Lee Whittenberg, Development Services Director '--' Mr. Whittenberg indicated that he had not from the absent members of the Committee, and perhaps they are held up in traffic. ill. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick said this was the time for any member of the Committee, staff or public to rearrange the order of the agenda, or request items to be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion. Member Hahn requested Item V-3, Receive and File City Council Staff Report re: Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station - Installation Restoration Program - Final Remedial Investigation Report for Operable Units 1, 2, and 3, dated January 8, 1996, be removed from the consent calendar for separate discussion. MOTION by Hahn; SECOND by Willey to remove Item V-3 from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and approve the remainder of the Agenda as presented. There being no objection, it was so ordered by Vice-Chairman Fitzpatrick. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick asked for oral communications from the audience. There were none. ~ D:\WPSl \AR.CHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 \...- Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 Member Unatin arrived at 5:09 P.M. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: BOLSA CHICA - WETLAND RESTORATION AGREEMENTS & BOLSA CHICA LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT 1-95 AND IMPLEMENTING ACTIONS PROGRAM - Supplemental Staff Report # 2, dated January 8, 1996 Recommendation: Receive and File City Council Staff Report. Mr. Whittenberg indicated that the Balsa Chica Land Trust has indicated they will be filing suit against the Coastal Commission regarding the approval of the project in violation of provisions of the Coastal Act. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Benjamin to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. There being no objection, it was so ordered by Vice-Chairman Fitzpatrick. Item for Separate Consideration: '-" 2. RECEIVE AND FILE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: SEAL BEACH NA VAL WEAPONS STATION - INST ALLA TION RESTORATION PROGRAM - FINAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT FOR OPERABLE UNITS 1, 2, AND 3, dated January 8, 1996 Recommendation: Receive and File City Council Staff Report. Member Hahn indicated she was concerned that the subject document did not indicate the existence of "ARARs" relating to archaeological issues relative to Site 1 soil removal activities, which is an archaeological site. As requested by the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation (ACHP), the site should be examined and recorded by a qualified professional prior to a removal action. This work may have been done, but it is not indicated. The Committee should not endorse the report until the Navy has taken the steps requested by the ACHP. Mr. Whittenberg indicated the subject report is relative to proposed removal actions regarding past practices which have resulted, in the case if Site 1, in contaminated soil, and that the Committee has previously reviewed and commented on an "Archaeological Resources Protection Plan" (ARPP) which includes Site 1. Member Hahn stated the ARPP really didn't cover the site, it said that SHPO had concluded there would be no negative impact, the Advisory Council, a federal agency, disagreed with the State's conclusion and wrote a letter to the Navy, telling them to go back and have a professional archaeologist assess the site, since it was an '-" D:\WPSl \AR.CHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 2 '-' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 archaeological site, based on a determination of a previous consultant of the Navy. Member Hahn indicated she hasn't seen any evidence this has been done. Mr. Whittenberg asked if a letter to the Navy to address this issue would be acceptable? Member Hahn indicated she would like to know if an archaeologist has assessed the site. Mr. Whittenberg asked if the Committee would like staff to prepare a draft letter for consideration at the next Committee meeting. Member Goldberg indicated she remembered the issue, but could not recall the outcome. Mr. Whittenberg indicated he would review the files, and prepare a letter for consideration of the Committee at the next meeting, addressing the concerns to the Navy, and then to ACHP, if no response is received from the Navy. Member Hahn also indicated the report lists many agencies which reviewed the document, but that SHPO and ACHP were not listed. Mr. Whittenberg indicated he would assume the document was not sent to those agencies, since it is a hazardous site investigation, not dealing with archaeological issues. Member Hahn indicated the National Historic Preservation Act is an "ARAR" for Site I, so the report should have gone to those reviewing agencies. Mr. Whittenberg indicated staff could address that issue in the letter also. "'" MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Benjamin to instruct staff to prepare a status report and proposed letter to the Naval Weapons Station for review by the Committee at the February 7, 1996 meeting and to receive and file the subject report. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Price, Unatin, Willey, Yearn, and Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick NOES: None ABSENT: Chairperson Frietze VI. SCHEDULED MATTERS 3. APPROV AL OF MINUTES: December 6, 1995 Recommendation: Approve Minutes with any corrections appropriate. Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of December 6, 1995. There were none. ~ D:\WPSl \AR.CHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 3 '-' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Willey to approve the Archaeological Advisory Committee minutes of December 6, 1995 as presented. MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-1-2 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Johnston, Price, Unatin, Willey, and Vice- Chairperson Fitzpatrick NOES: None ABSENT: Chairperson Frietze ABSTAIN: Hahn and Yearn 3. REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED HELLMAN PROPERTY ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION (Continued from December 6, 1995) A. Proposed "Scope of Work" B. Proposed" Agreement for Archaeological Investigation Services" '-' Recommendation: Review and consider subject report documents and Request from Archaeologist. Instruct Staff and Archaeologist to complete revisions to "Scope of Work" and "Agreement for Archaeological Investigation Services" for consideration of Committee on February 7, 1996. Mr. Whittenberg introduced Dave Bartlett, representing Hellman Properties, and Dr. Gary Stickel, City Archaeologist, to the Committee and briefly reviewed the staff report, providing an update to the Committee of what has transpired since the last meeting of the Committee. Mr. Whittenberg further indicated he has presented a supplemental memorandum to the Committee which includes a letter from Dave Bartlett outlining additional actions taken by Hellman Properties to resolve outstanding issues relating to previous archaeological investigations conducted on behalf of the previous developer of the property and concerns relative to the proposed scope of work and agreement. Mr. Bartlett addressed the Committee, indicating Hellman Properties is attempting to get there arms around the physical constraints that impact the site. It is the first time the Hellman family has undertaken this type of an effort. Critical to the understanding of the site is the constraints relating to geology, wetlands, cultural resources, etc. , before any specific planning takes place. Hellman is wishing to understand the constraints to the greatest extent possible, evaluate them, and keep them in the forefront as a land planning process begins. A major issue archaeological concerns. Mr. Bartlett spoke to '-" D: \WPS 1 \AR.CHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 4 '--' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 Les Card, a principal of LSA, this morning and the previous developer has a legal obligation to share information relating to the previous project with Hellman Properties. The previous developer did not pay his bills, and the consultants are reluctant to release this information since it was not paid for. Mr. Bartlett indicated he is working with the previous developer to have LSA release whatever information they may have, such as excavation notes, excavated material to allow Dr. Stickel to evaluate and utilize any appropriate information. In response to a question, Mr. Bartlett indicated he has been informed by the previous developer that about 900 bags of excavated materials has been discarded. LSA feels they may have field and excavation notes. Member hahn indicated a friend of hers on the Environmental Quality Control Board had talked to her about a year ago, and that Mr. Card indicated the material was returned to the previous developer, and the material was stored in a trailer on Jamboree. Mr. Bartlett indicated his discussions with the previous developer indicate the material is no longer available, but they will continue to explore this matter with the previous developer. ~ Member Goldberg inquired how much money is involved to pay the consultants to obtain the information on behalf of the City. Mr. Bartlett indicated he had no idea, but it is the hundreds of thousands of dollars. The recourse is to go into court to enforce the terms of the agreement between Hellman Properties and the previous developer. Member Benjamin inquired what other information is available? Mr. Bartlett indicated there is lots of information from the earlier Ponderosa project and from other studies done in the past which will be made available. It is the most recent information which needs to be used and evaluated by Dr. Stickel. Mr. Whittenberg indicated from the city's viewpoint, a lot of research was done on the Hellman Ranch in the mid-50's and late-60's, with the recent work from 1990-1991 having gone down a black hole. It is the concern of the City that the most recent information be able to be reviewed by Dr. Stickel. Member Fitzpatrick asked if Hellman Properties has a timeline for the resolution of the matter relating to the previous developer? Mr. Bartlett indicated if the 900 bags of material are just not available, it will then be a judgement for the City, this committee, and Dr. Stickel, as to how to proceed with the research design and site survey. There apparently was a research design approved, and he is trying to get a copy of it from the Corps of Engineers. Mr. Whittenberg indicated the City has a research design prepared by LSA in 1990, which is referenced in the "Scope of Work" document, and that it is probably the same one approved by the Corps of Engineers. Member Benjamin inquired as to the time line set forth by Hellman Properties of 180 days. Mr. Bartlett indicated it would be the desire to complete the field work and report preparation in 180 days or less, as opposed to the 180-270 day period set forth in the draft scope of work. Hellman Properties wants to understand the constraints as soon as possible, even though they are not on a fast track to preparing any development '--' D:\WPSl \ARCHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 5 '--' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 proposals. In response to a question from Member Goldberg, Mr. Bartlett indicated Hellman Properties has only ideas and concepts at this time, they want to understand the physical constraints prior to developing and land use plans. Mr. Bartlett also indicated that Dr. Stickel has the permission of Hellman Properties to discuss directly with LSA and the previous developer the availability of information derived from 1990-1991, when LSA was working on the site. '-" Dr. Stickel thanked the Committee for a good review of the initial draft of the scope of . work. He indicated the approach he is proposing is set forth in his letter to the City, which has been provided to the Committee. This is an important project, with multiple sites, and major questions regarding each site still exist, such as site boundaries and cultural resources within each site. All information will be extremely helpful. Dr. Stickel indicated that since archaeology is an exploratory science, and therefor, it is not possible to propose a full scope of work initially. He is proposing an interactive program, which will start with a literature and resource review and preparation of a research design, which can be completed rather quickly. A time schedule is difficult to establish, given the unknown parameters of the project at this time. The investigation will be done in a cost effective manner in accordance with the various legal mandates applicable. Step 1 would be the literature search-research design, with the research design being a scope of work for a particular site investigation. The literature search assists in the preparation of a rational and effective research design. Each step would be separately approved and funded with a specified time table. The literature search- research design phase should take less than a month to complete, unless there are severe extenuating circumstances. The preparation of a research design document is not dependent on the availability of the 900 bags of material, as the research design will pertain to the entire site. The 900 bags would be relevant to further analysis of the specific sites from which the material was excavated. Upon review and approval of the research design by the City and by Hellman Properties, the next step would be a new site walkover survey of the entire site, which will not be difficult to complete, given the topography of the site. A crew of archaeologists and a Native American would conduct the walkover survey. The purpose of the walkover survey is to determine the number of sites still on the property, define boundary definitions, and correlate previous excavations. The next step would consist of individual test phases at each site. The test phase is designed to define the size, depth, and richness of cultural and ecofacts, and age of each site. A goal would be to have at least one radiocarbon date for each site, which mayor may not be possible. The existence of special features, such as human burials, large structures, etc., would require additional time and efforts to fully analyze. He would recommend preservation if a lot of burials are encountered. In response to a question from Member Johnston, Dr. Stickel indicated 5-6 burials would be considered very significant, and he would recommend preservation. ~ D:\WPSl \ARCHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MlN\LW\Ol-19-96 6 '-' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 He further indicated that the cooperation of Native Americans is very important, and will rely on the Committee, the City, and the local tribe as to how to choose appropriate Native American monitors. Member Johnston asked Mr. Whittenberg who would designate the Native American Monitor? Mr. Whittenberg indicated the Archaeoloeical Element of the General Plan contains provisions regarding Native American Monitors, but he would have to research those provisions and report back to the Committee. In response to a question from Member Benjamin, Dr. Stickel indicated the practice is not to radiocarbon date human remains, but other material can be dated. Member Johnston indicated a forensic pathologist can determine the approximate age of human remains by studying the deterioration of the bones. In response to a question from Member Unatin, it was indicated that bags of material mayor may not contain dirt and are usually shopping bags from super markets. In response to another question from Member Unatin as to why the desire to complete the work within 6 months, as opposed to 9-12 months, Mr. Bartlett indicated Hellman Properties does not want to just continually study, they wish to eventually propose a development plan. If 6 months is not an appropriate time, that is fine, eventually Hellman Properties wishes to develop the property. '-' In response to additional questions from the Committee regarding the sharing of information from the previous developer, Mr. Bartlett again reviewed the current status of discussions with LSA and the previous developer. Member Goldberg indicated, based on comments from Dr. Stickel, the material is not required but would be helpful. The Committee should separate that concern from the initiation of the project and the research design. In response to a question from Member Goldberg, Dr. Stickel indicated the walkover survey should be completed within a week to two weeks time. At this time it is not possible yo state a time for the test phase work, since the number of test pits and the richness of those sites cannot be quantified at this time. Number of test pits would not be specified until completion of the walkover survey, and it is possible to work on multiple test pits at the same time. , Member Unatin left the meeting at 6:00 p.m. Member Hahn indicated a stepped-phase approach is proposed, and this should be put in writing and presented to the Committee and Hellman Properties at another meeting. Mr. Whittenberg indicated that is what is recommended. Dr. Stickel indicated he could also detail the first phase of the work also, which would be the literature search-research design phase. In response to a question from Member Fitzpatrick, Mr. Whittenberg indicated the first step is to revise the scope of work and agreement, have that reviewed by the Committee on February 7, and then be approved by the City Council. Mr. Whittenberg reviewed the requirements of the Archaeological Element relating to the '-' D:\WPSl \ARCHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 7 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 approval of a research design by the City Council. Member Goldberg asked if the literature review/research design can be considered at the same time by the City Council. Dr. Stickel indicated that approach would at least define the location of sites. Even if the process were to stop at that time, and then resume at a later point in time, the information developed up to the walkover survey would not need to be repeated. Mr. Bartlett indicated Hellman Properties is agreeable to the process being discussed. Member Goldberg confirmed that Dr. Stickel will be revising the scope of work and the agreement, presenting that to the Committee for review on February 7, and recommendation to the City Council. MOTION by Hahn; SECOND by Price to request Dr. Stickel to revise the Scope of Work and submit firm bids for the first two phases of the proposed scope of work, Literature Search-Research Design and Walkover Survey, for review and consideration of the Committee on February 7, 1996, with the necessary documents provided to Mr. Whittenberg by February 1. MOTION CARRIED: 8-0-2 AYES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Price, Willey, Yearn, and Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick '--' NOES: None ABSENT: Unatin and Chairperson Frietze 5. REVIEW OF PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 4254 re: ABSENCE OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Recommendation: Review and consider provisions relating to absences of Committee members. Instruct Staff to prepare any further amendments regarding absences for consideration of Committee on February 7, 1996, or receive and file staff report. Vice Chairman Fitzpatrick asked if the remainder of the agenda could be continued to February 7 as he has a meeting conflict. MOTION by Price; SECOND by Goldberg to continue the remainder of the agenda to February 7, 1996. MOTION CARRIED: 8-0-2 ~ D:\WPSl \ARCHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MIN\LW\Ol-19-96 8 '-"' Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes January 17, 1996 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Johnston, Price, Willey, Yearn, and Vice-Chairperson Fitzpatrick NOES: None ABSENT: Unatin and Chairperson Frietze VII. COMl\.fi'ITEE CONCERNS None Vill. STAFF CONCERNS None IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Price; SECOND by Willey to adjourn the meeting at 6: 15 p.m. to Wednesday, February 7, 1996, 5:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers. '-" Vice-Chairperson, Archaeological Advi Whittenberg, Secretary Archaeological Advisory Commit Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved by the Archaeological Advisory Committee. The Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes of January 17, 1996 were approved on F 16312-1/ f'rr2-. 'i 7 ,1996. '-" D: \WPS 1 \ARCHCOMM\Ol-17-96.MlN\LW\Ot-19-96 9