Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAAC Min 1996-11-06 ~ ~ ~ CITY OF SEAL BEACH ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 6, 1996 L CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Frietze called the meeting to order at 5:03 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Present: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick (5:09 PM), Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Unatin (5:05 PM), Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze Absent: Member Johnston Staff Present: Lee Whittenberg, Development Services Director Mr. Whittenberg indicated he had not heard from any members of the Committee, and perhaps they are held up in traffic. ill. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Chair asked for changes to the agenda. Member Goldberg requested item #2 be replaced with item #4 because volunteers from the Gum Grove Park group here and this way their item of interest would proceed the other items and they could leave early. MOTION by Hahn; SECOND by Goldberg to have Item #4 proceed Item #2. MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-3 AYES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Members Fitzpatrick, Johnston, and Unatin MOTION by Price; SECOND by Goldberg to approve the Agenda as revised. C:\My Documents\ARCHCOMM\1 I-06-96.MIN.doc\LWII 1-25-96 ~ Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 MOTION CARRIED: 7-0-3 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Members Fitzpatrick, Johnston, and Unatin IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Frietze asked for oral communications from the audience. There were none. v. CONSENT CALENDAR - No Items VI. SCHEDULED MA TIERS Member Unatin arrived at 5 :05 PM. ~ 1. Approval of Committee Minutes - October 9, 1996 The Committee discussed any corrections to the Minutes of October 9th. The following typographical errors were noted: Page 9: Page 12: Dr. Minch said he would write comments into parts. It should be "if' not "id." Last paragraph, "Member Willey asked if this should be done in two letters". This should be plural, not singular. Member Hahn asked if she found an error in an approved set of minutes what should be done? She said the minutes say that what was being said could not be heard on the audio tape. But she knew what was said and should have brought that before the Committee. The Committee decided to pass on this correction, as the minutes had already been approved. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Willey to approve the Minutes as corrected on page 9 and 12, noted above. MOTION CARRIED: 6-0-2-2 A YES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Price, Unatin, Willey, and Young NOES: None ~ ll.o6-96.MIN.doe 2 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6, 1996 ABSENT: Members Fitzpatrick and Johnston ABSTAIN: Members Hahn and Chairperson Frietze 4. REVIEW and DISCUSSION with Gum Grove Nature Park Group regarding issues of mutual concern regarding Gum Grove Park Member Fitzpatrick arrived at 5 :09 PM. Mr. Whittenberg said the Archaeological Advisory Committee wished to meet with the Gum Grove Nature Park Group to discuss concerns, including maintenance of the existing grove of trees, improvement of that grove and how what the Group would want to do would impact the Archaeological Committee. The Committee determined to discuss this matter for approximately 15 minutes. He felt that Mario Voce should speak first because he was the individual requesting this item be agendized. ....., Mario Voce introduced himself, Sally Hirsch and Gayle Knapp, members of the Gum Grove Nature Park Group. Mr. Voce said he requested being placed on the agenda because it was brought to his attention there might be archaeological sensitivities in Gum Grove Park. He didn't want a conflict of interest created between the restoration efforts and archaeological sensitivities. He said the Committee's packet should have contained the forester's statement on Long Horn Borer eradication and it's effect on trees. There had been some tree planting that had caused concern in the Gum Grove. Discussing the restoration efforts, Mr. Voce noted everything in biology is cyclical and goes according to calendars of various rhythms. The Group that is doing the pruning in the Park is only to remove dead libelous wood which could fall and hurt someone or wood that is diseased and poses a pathological hazard to adjacent trees. The tree diseases begin at this time when the nights are long and cold. It's cycle eases in February - March when the nights get short. We are dealing with insect dormancy cycles. We have to make sure if any wood is disturbed that it happens when the insect, including the Long Horn Borer, is at its least active stage of its life cycle. When wood is cut, it can give off scents which attract adult beetles to come in and lay eggs. Any tree planting would be done toward the late winter and early spring, after the ground has been softened by winter rains and after the pruning is completed. This year the pruning is scheduled in January. He noted Gum Grove Day is scheduled for April 27, 1997. There are other programs they would like to institute to engage area youth and also adults. This would include education on the history of Gum Grove Park, its biological significance and the history of the area. He hoped to gain volunteers to assist in the Park's restoration. Restoration includes dealing with food chains, both the plant kingdom and the animals which base themselves on the plant food chain. By maximizing biological potential he means preserve the Monarch butterfly, add trees which could produce food for birds and insects which the birds consume. They have concerns for raptors, large predatory birds which roost in the snags of the trees. They feed on the Navy base but they perch in the Gum Grove and scout there also. We're dealing with a wilderness '-" 11.Q6.96.MIN.doe 3 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6,1996 area, not a recreational site. These two are very different. As opposed to manicuring the area and precluding a lot of life forms, we are encouraging life forms. We'd like to do all this without disturbing archaeological areas, if they exist in Gum Grove, as they would be a part of the richness of this place. Chairperson Frietze said the Archaeological Committee had been upset to learn from the City that trees were being uprooted in the Gum Grove Park, along with the adjacent soils. The Committee knows the Gum Grove Park area was inhabited at some point and the Committee doesn't know what archaeological finds are there. However, if the Gum Grove Group is saying they are simply pruning branches, she would not have a problem with that. Member Benjamin asked Mr. Voce if he is a Forrest Ranger or is he getting advice from the Forestry Department? Mr. Voce said they are getting advice from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. They also had assistance from the Orange County Fire Authority last year when the pruning was going on last winter. They hired a private arborist to actually remove the trees. Then the County Fire personnel came in and helped remove and cut up some of that wood. They are still deciding on this year's pruning and they have to have the Forestry people come through and take a current inventory. ~ Member Unatin asked Mr. Voce if the trees were just being pruned? Mr. Voce said there were some trees where the County Fire Authority came in and helped to cut up and remove the dead wood. In the process they did remove some of the stumps. However, a lot of the other stumps did remain. Unfortunately, it was not brought to their attention that this could be considered an archaeological disturbance. That was certainly not their intention, otherwise he wouldn't let it have happened. He did want to preserve at least one good tree stump so he could sand it off and coat it and have a Count The Tree Rings demonstration, as it ties into the history of how old Gum Grove is as a forest. Member Goldberg asked if it would be possible for Mr. Voce to get a map and give it to this Committee which would show where they should not be removing trees until the investigations are finalize? Mr. Voce said he felt peculiar asking the Committee where the archaeological sites are because he is not supposed to have that information, for security reasons. At the same time, direction on what is considered safe and not of an archaeological concern, would be appreciated. Member Goldberg said that at the present time the archaeological sites are not known. And until the surveying and digging work gets started... . The question she had is that this Group is actually planting new trees now. Mr. Voce said yes, eleven seedling trees were planted. Member Goldberg asked if there were any way the Gum Grove Nature Park Group could put a hold on planting until it has gotten through the City Council to see if Gum Grove park is going to be a part of the excavation? At this point, the Archaeological Committee will probably make a recommendation to do a total archaeological evaluation. But the City may decide not to do that. '-" 1l-06.96.MIN.doe 4 ~ Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 Mr. Voce said they could put things on hold for awhile. In the meantime, they are trying to arrange for an over-the-ground irrigation system. That should have priority over planting at this time. They do have eleven new seedling trees and watering has to be done by hand and this is quite a chore. They also have to do more research in terms of species selection. Other ideas brought forth by the Group were planting smaller, one gallon, trees, rather than 15 gallon trees. This would, however, cause soil disturbance. Member Hahn said she felt Mr. Voce and his group appear to share the same goals with the Archaeological Committee and wanted to thank them for enhancing Gum Grove Park by planting trees., the concern of the Committee is that sites be test phased to ensure sites are not being damaged. The Minutes of the last meeting reflect a long discussion, "parts were lifted out of context" and perhaps the Committee's intent was misrepresented. The Committee is squarely behind the improvements to the park, they are concerned about the areas that are sites., and would like them protected. Because we share the same goals, maybe we can come up with a strategy which will protect the environment. Chairperson Frietze said the Committee should be notified if the Group wanted to plant a tree. Mr. Voce said he is more than pleased to disburse information, indicating that the more people know what is going on, the more people who might get interested and help them. ......., Member Willey said she believed that Dr. Stickel has, or is in the process of defining the site boundaries in Gum Grove. She asked Mr. Whittenberg if he had that information? She asked if staff would be able to coordinate between the various work in Gum Grove Park, and indicate that is and is not of an interest to the Committee? Could he alert a Committee member to be present just in case something turns up? Member Hahn said there are other persons, other than this Conunittee, who are privy to the site locations. Those are the Planning Department staff and members of the City Council. She thought you could check with anyone who had access to the maps. Mr. Whittenberg felt that if the Committee has a comfort level with it being done at a staff level .... At this point he did not have detailed maps to show us on the Gum Grove Park area what has been identified by Dr. Stickel as the site boundaries. Once he has those, that information and co-ordinate with the Committee. If it's obviously not in the area, staff could give the go-ahead for that work. If there were questionable or obvious areas of concern those should be brought to the Committee's attention. Member Goldberg said she wanted to see that both groups work well together so when they meet together at a Council meeting it will show they are a unit and are both really interested in doing better things for the community. This Committee's concern is it is a possibility that the excavation may not be done in that area. The big push this Committee has is that they want that to be a part of the whole study. The Council is going to meet Monday. Ifplanting were to be put on hold for awhile, she would have no problem with cleaning up. ~ Member Hahn said Mayor Forsythe indicated the State Office of Historic Preservation's policy 11-06-96.MIN.doc 5 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6, 1996 is that if nothing is going to be changed, then there won't be any intrusion into the ground; the best policy is to leave it alone. But to follow that argument to its logical conclusion would rule out planting the trees. This is one of the reasons the Committee believes the area should be test phased. Because SHPO, if they learn there will be impacts to the ground in an archaeological site, their policy is not to leave it alone, but to do a test phase. Mrs. Hirsch asked if the Group was going to plant trees in an area that was not of concern to the Committee would that make a difference? The Committee said no. Mr. Whittenberg said that information would help direct the group with their planting program. Mr. Voce said the amount of work needed to be done in the Gum Grove is volumetric. There is a lot of work to do without having to get in the archaeologists way. Their group would appreciate receiving the Committee's time line as it is available. They deal in biological time -- months to years. Archaeology is a little different that this. Because they deal with seasonal issues, any time-line information would be very helpful. Mr. Whittenberg said the planting schedule would start in late winter to early spring --- before it gets too warm and too dried up. He indicated has received general direction, and suggested putting this issue on the Committee's February agenda, as by then there may be more detailed information available. ~ Mr. Voce pointed out that at the lowest point of Gum Grove, not far from the fence line, there is an emergency vehicle road. Right now its composed of ground-up macadam from the streets of Old Town. His hope is that a magic wand will pass and that stuff will disappear. That would mean a bulldozer going back on that road and regrading it or skimming it off There is the possibility that that area could be impacted in that capacity. This would involve earth moving etc. Member Goldberg said this Committee should be well done by the time anything like that would take place. Mr. Voce agreed this would be far down the road. Member Benjamin asked Mr. Voce how long he had been involved in the restoration process? Mr. Voce said it's been a few years. These matters take a lot of fund raising and advance planning. Right now they're doing biological saving. He noted he is not a biologist. Member Goldberg said that if the archaeological excavation is done, part of Gum Grove Park would have to be closed off for awhile, until the excavation is done. She applauded the open communication and agreed with re-agendizing this matter for February. Mr. Voce asked if the whole Park would be closed? How large would the closed areas be? Dr. Stickel said it would not be necessary to close the Park entirely. The Committee and Mr. Voce discussed in general terms the size of area that might need to be restricted during an archaeological investigation. Member Hahn said that because this is a part of the Hellman property, she did not think the ~ ll.o6-96.MIN.doc 6 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 Group would want to dig into an archaeological site either. Mr. Voce agreed, saying that would go against his principals. Member Hahn said it would serve everyone to take advantage of the situation, it's an opportunity to have a test phase performed so that the mystery is solved and tree planting can be done without worry. Mrs. Hirsch asked what if the planting does not occur in a sensitive area, then nothing is being disturbed. Mr. Voce said the security from the Park can be problematic, there has been vandalism. In terms of barriers, he felt they must be child-proof, as the Park is used by kids on bikes. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Price to agendize this item in February 1997. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn Price, Unatin, Willey, Young and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Johnston 3. Review of City Council Consideration of A Research Design and Investigation Program of Archaeological Sites Located on the Hellman Ranch, City of Seal Beach, California '-' Chairperson Frietze reviewed the recommendation as stated on the agenda. Mr. Whittenberg said there has been a modification to staffs recommendation. Because the Committee did not get the revised document until this evening, a draft letter has not been prepared, as the draft document has not been reviewed by staff He felt the Committee might want to go through the responses, and Dr. Stickel has provided a revised document based on those responses. If your review can't be completed in one night, the Committee could choose to continue it. Member Goldberg asked if the City Council would be bringing this up at Monday's meeting? Mr. Whittenberg said the Council's Monday meeting has been postponed due to the holiday. They decided not to meet November 12th, but to meet November 18th. November 12th is about the last date this Committee could hold a meeting on this matter. He explained when the agenda packets go out to the Council members and the time constraints. Member Unatin asked if it was the Committee's intention to review this document line-by-line? "This is Dr. Stickel's report, not the Committee's report". He queried how the Committee would be best-served? Mr. Whittenberg said that at the last meeting the Committee indicated it wanted to review the revised document before forwarding its recommendation to the Council. That is why the ~ II-06-96.MIN.doc 7 Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6, 1996 ~ matter is back on the agenda for this meeting. If the Committee determines not to continue in that matter, that is your choice to make. Member Unatin said he wanted to make the point that he doesn't intend to sit here and fix grammar, argue about the necessity of "ravaged" and the rest of that stuff ever again. This is Dr. Stickel's report. If there are points that were noted in his evaluation of the Peer Review that are of interest, that's another matter. Otherwise, this is Dr. Stickel's report. MOTION by Unatin to not review the document line-by-Iine, if there are specific points that require clarification, to discuss those matters. Member Goldberg said she had made the Motion to ask Dr. Stickel to do this. She was disappointed it wasn't here last week so the .committee would have had the time to review it. She asked Dr. Stickel if the corrections and answers he gave to the Coastal Commission, SHPO and the Peer Reviews, have they all been incorporated and updated? Has everything been changed in the document he is presenting tonight? Dr. Stickel said yes. ....... Member Goldberg said she agreed then with Member Unatin. Member Unatin asked the members if they had read Dr. Stickel's responses, and are there any questions? He said again it is not the Committee's document. Member Willey said, that in response to Member Unatin, she felt there was no reason to go over it sentence by sentence. She can look at the responses but what I've got is a whole bunch of documents that have been redlined and everything else to the point where she doesn't know what's what. She would like to take the document home and look through it and see what it looks like now. She looked at every single response but it didn't give her a document that's comfortable to sit down and read; she wants to read it like a novel. If there are remaining questions, those could be answered, although she doesn't necessarily expect there will be questions. Member Willey proposed the committee meet once more to deal with any remaining questions. Member Unatin said she should also mention some of the things that were discussed about the intention of this Committee being a way to layout this area that can be properly examined. He had a good lecture at the last meeting on the realities of the situation --- how much time is necessary. Member Unatin asked Member Willey to talk about the time-frame aspect of this document, which were discussed after the last meeting. Member Willey said the things discussed after the last meeting were simply different approaches to it, given different kinds of time and different sets of circumstances. One of the things she was discussing with Member Unatin was that if this were a university project where you had essentially unlimited time, you could excavate it in a more comprehensive manner. '--" 11-06-96.MIN.do< 8 Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6.1996 '-" But cultural resource management doesn't work that way, it tries to achieve the most reasonable process possible in a project that one assumes is going to be approved at some time, then one has to attempt the archaeology in the most reasonable process possible. She talked about a dam construction project in Pennsylvania which spanned seven years. She noted that a project will stop if during the construction phase items of archaeological interest are found, there is no question about that, and the new information assessed. Member Willey reviewed several methods utilized for cultural resource management. Member Unatin noted that what stuck in his mind was the limited time frame, and a limited amount of resources, and felt perhaps the Committee was looking at it from a more academic point of view, but now, there is more reality in the picture. Member Willey said her position, as a citizen of Seal Beach as well as an archaeologist is that she firmly believes that this project is going to happen. She expects the City Council will approve, she doesn't know that, but she expects that to happen. If that happens the Committee has to do the best possible job it can to get an idea of the archaeological resources that are present. ~ Member Benjamin asked if this should be brought back at another meeting? Member Unatin indicated he didn't bring this up to directly affect what the committee will do with Dr. Stickel's report, more as a reality check that there is a limited amount of time and resources. Various members of the committee indicated agreement. MOTION by Benjamin; SECOND by _ to meet in a week. Motion fails due to lack of second. Member Goldberg asked Dr. Stickel if this is a document, after all the revisions, he feels comfortable with and with which he could do a superb job for the City? Dr. Stickel said yes. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Benjamin for time to read this report and adjourn to a special meeting. Then prepare a letter to the City Council as a whole or with minority reports. AMENDED MOTION by Hahn; SECOND by _ to review the full range of information, in the event the Council is considering a different course of action. Member Goldberg asked how can you see what the Council is going to do? Member Goldberg indicated she would not accept the amendment, she wants to look at the revised document and see what this committee says. ~ Member Willey said that to be effective to the Council the Committee needs to draft some sort of document which says this is our recommendation. Whether they choose to accept that or not, that's up to them. As a Committee we should say "Yes, we agree with Dr. Stickel's document and this is what we would like to see happen" or "We more or less agree with it, II-06-96.MIN.doc 9 Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 ~ with a few reservations" or whatever the committee ultimately decides after reading the final document. Member Unatin asked if staff would prepare a basic opinion letter? Mr. Whittenberg said staff had already done this once in a different format for the previous document. Staff would revise the letter to reflect the date of this document. It was set up to be able to incorporate modifications by separate motions and votes of the Committee. The City Council could then see which specific items you, as a Committee, had concerns with. He noted it would be appropriate to include a specific date in the motion. The Committee discussed meeting on November 12. Amended Motion fails due to lack ofa second. The Committee discussed letting staff know if there were any changes. The majority felt it was best to meet again as a Committee, with Dr. Stickel present to answer questions. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Johnston ~ MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Willey that the Committee meet on Tuesday, November 12, 1996 at 5:00 p.m. This will be only item on this agenda. MOTION CARRIED: 8-0-1-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: None ABSENT: Member Johnston ABSTAIN: Member Fitzpatrick 2. Review and Discuss Archaeological Resources Protection Plan - Decommissioning of the Research Testing and Evaluation Area, Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach, CA ... Mr. Whittenberg said this matter was on the last agenda as a Receive and File item. The Committee asked that it be pulled from the Consent Calendar and be brought back to the full Committee for discussion. Mr. Whittenberg then discussed the Committee's possible choices. ~ 11.06-96.MJN.00c 10 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 Member Goldberg said she had asked this be agendized because she felt the Committee had been ignoring their relationship with the Navy. The Navy needs to know the City is interested and wants to continue to be updated., if nothing more than to say that the Committee is interested and wants to continue to be updated. She felt it wasn't enough to have only the City Council respond, and not the Committee. The Committee cannot ignore what is going on at the Naval Weapons Station. Member Unatin asked if the Committee will address the responses provided by Dr. Stickel. The Committee indicated they had no concerns regarding Dr. Stickel's response memo. Mr. Whittenberg indicated his understanding of the Committee action is that the Committee will review the revised Research Design report in light of the response memo, and if there are still questions, that will be discussed at the next meeting. That was the understanding of the Committee. ~ Mr. Minch said he wanted to explained what's in the revised version of the Research Design document. They took their original version, and the Mayor's redlined version and all the comments the Committee made and he put all those into a revised document which he has given the Committee. Then he and Dr. Stickel discussed the three Peer Reviews and the Coastal Commission's comments and SHPO. They made their responses to that. They also indicated where they made changes. All the changes are in the document. The Committee has a document which addresses the Mayor's concerns, their review of the Mayor's concerns and what this Committee decided. He apologized for any delay but noted he moved his entire office. The Committee asked Mr. Whittenberg to prepare a letter to the Navy indicating the Committee is reading the documents they are providing and informing ourselves on what they are doing. This should be sent from Mr. Whittenberg as Secretary of the Committee. MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Fitzpatrick for Director Whittenberg to prepare a letter to the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station as described above. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Johnston IX. ADJOURNMENT ~ 1l-06-96.MIN.doe 11 '-" Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes November 6. 1996 MOTION by Price; SECOND by Hahn to adjourn the regular meeting to Wednesday, November 12, 1996 at 5:00 p.m. MOTION CARRIED: 9-0-1 AYES: Members Benjamin, Fitzpatrick, Goldberg, Hahn, Price, Unatin, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Frietze NOES: ABSENT: None Member Johnston ~1-~L C rperson, Archaeological Advisory Committee '-' ee Whittenberg, Secretary Archaeological Advisory Committee Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved by the Archaeological Advisory Committee. The Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes of November 6, 1996 were approved on Dre '7' ' 1996 '-' 11.06-96.MIN.do< 12