Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAAC Min 1997-08-13 CITY OF SEAL BEACH ~ ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ADJOURNED MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1997 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Johnston called the meeting to order at 5:34 P.M. in the City Council Chambers ROLL CALL Present: Willey, Young, and Chairperson Johnston Also Present: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Absent: Goldberg, Fitzpatrick '-' Mr. Whittenberg Member Fitzpatrick is attending an out-of-state conference. Member Goldberg called to say she was having eye problems and might not be able to attend. MOTION by Willey; SECOND by Young to excuse the absence of Member Fitzpatrick. MOTION CARRIED: 3-0-2 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Willey, Young, and Chairperson Johnston None None Fitzpatrick, Goldberg The Committee determined to wait and see if Member Goldberg would arrive. If not, a motion would be made later in the meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Chair indicated this AAC meeting was called specifically to review KEA's Research Design for the Hellman Ranch. Therefore, there is no agenda to approve. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS '-' C:lMy DocumentsIARCHCOMM\08-13-97 Minutes.doc\L W\08-28-97 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 ...... Adrea Stoker * Long Beach Ms. Stoker said she is very angry and asked if this is the final Research Design? Will comments and considerations be made and answered by KEA? Mr. Whittenberg said the comment period for the Research Design is open until September 1, 1997. KEA will be revising the Research Design and then it will go to the City Council. ~ Ms. Stoker said "I did not speak last week at the Archaeology Advisory Committee because I thought the Research Design was a draft, not a final. When I discovered it was not a draft, I was incensed. The Archaeology Advisory Committee made it very clear that they wanted an ethical company to do the Research Design, thus eliminating SRS and their monitors. Well this company, KEA, is either sloppy and unprofessional or unethical. Mayor Forsythe promised Lillian Robles, at a Council meeting, that she would be consulted on this project, and KEA said they would consult with Native Americans. Neither of these quote-unquote professionals kept their word. My mother taught me to keep my word or I would be lying. What do you call not keeping your word, KEA? This Research Design is so inadequate, if a lay person, Moira Hahn, can find over forty glaring errors or omissions, thank goodness for Moira Hahn. I call this Research Design "a developer's delight". KEA, when you sit down with your family tomorrow morning for breakfast, I wonder if you can honestly look at your children, look them in the eye, and say I am an honest and ethical father who does quality and thorough research designs. I know the Archaeology Committee has spent many, many hours in a conscientious manner, working hard on the Hellman project, making no dollars. But even if you don't accept this research design, the City Council will accept it, I will bet $100 on this, and my $100 will go to the Mayor's favorite charity if I am wrong. Thank you." There being no other comments, on matters other than the Research Design, the Chair closed this portion ofthe agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR - No Items SCHEDULED MATTERS 1. REVIEW and CONSIDERATION of "A Research Design For The Evaluation Of Archaeological Sites Within The Hellman Ranch Specific PlLm. Area", prepared by KEA Environmental, dated July 24, 1997 (Continued from August 6, 1997) '-" Mr. Whittenberg indicated this is a continued matter from the August 6 meeting of the Committee, and that the comment period on the Research Design will continue to September 1, and the Committee may determine to schedule another public comment meeting on the Research Design at the conclusion of this meeting. If another meeting is not scheduled, the City will accept written comments until the September 1 date and those 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 2 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 '--' comments will be forwarded to KEA for consideration. The revised Research Design, and the comments and responses will then be forwarded to the City Council for consideration on September 22. Copies of the Staff Report from the August 6 meeting outlining the schedule for this matter are available at this meeting. Mr. Whittenberg also indicated KEA has submitted a supplemental addendum page, which discuses Ora site 1473, dated August 13, and copies of it are also available. Without objection, Chairperson Johnston opened the public comment period to receive public comments on the Research Design for the Hellman Ranch project. Member Goldberg arrived. Moira Hahn * Seal Beach Ms. Hahn read into the Record her comments, dated August 13, and those ofDrs. Chester King and Clay Singer, dated August 12, 1997; attached in full and not repeated here. ~ Dave Bartlett * Representative for Hellman Properties Mr. Bartlett indicated they will be submitting comments prior to the September 1 deadline. He further indicated the fundamental premise of this project is balance. This project balances the land use, community and environmental benefits and ownership economics. The balance is achieved through responsible land use planning and stewardship of the land. Balance is achieved on this project by maintaining a majority of the property as open space; 77% of the project will be open space. By reducing the number of housing units from 329 to 70, by incorporating the State Lands property into the plan, allowing some commercial use, but retaining space for an interpretive center, and for the historic Krenwinkle House. By providing visitor-serving recreational opportunities in the Coastal zone for the City and for the region. By allowing a significant portion of the property to be open to the public. By restoring biological productivity to the site, restoring degraded and severely degraded wetlands, recreating an important link in the Pacific flyway. By donating Gum Grove Park to the City with a deed restriction, saying it can only be used in perpetuity as an urban forest. There are cultural resources in Gum Grove Park and they will be preserved in place. Unrestricted public access to the Park will be guaranteed through this project. The cultural resources on the mesa are subject to mitigation as outlined in the EIR and the KEA Research Design. He noted the Hellman family is very responsible and takes this project very seriously. They have owned this property over 100 years. Their initial purchase was 8,000 acres. The balance being achieved by this plan --- the open space, the restoration, the conservation, the preservation --- could not be achieved if a developer had to purchase this property, with debt service and interest. This can be witnessed by prior approvals on this site --- such as 1000 units, 329 units or 773 units. They are and will continue to be very respectful of Native American concerns and the regulations that are in place to guide projects. They will follow the spirit and letter of the law, as it relates to archaeology issues on this site. Hellman Properties wishes to implement the balance, including mitigationof some sites, and preservation of other sites. '-' 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 3 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13,1997 '-' Lillian Valenzuela Robles * Juaneno Elder Ms. Robles said she was deeply disappointed in the EIR, feeling it was unclear. She was happy to learn they were going to write it again. She read and re-read it but "it was as clear as mud". If they seem paranoid about Hellman Ranch, it's because they have been betrayed at Bolsa Chica and Ora-64. They are vigilant, almost like a tiger protecting the little that's left. "We're hurting. We don't want to be vindictive. We want the respect that's due us." She said they appreciate the Hellman family and what they're going through. "1 just wish they were generous enough to give it to the City". Eugene Ruyle * Cal State Long Beach * Anthropology Department Mr. Ruyle said he was present at the August 6th meeting, where he expressed his concerns and uneasiness about his initial reading. He said the more he reads the more uneasy he gets. The issue of Native American values has not been addressed. It's important that people understand the history of Native American's in Southern California. He brought a tape from 500 Nations, the series which appeared on CBS, narrated by Kevin Costner. It's a IS-minute tape which dealing with what happened to the Native Americans with the coming of the missions, ranchos and White people. This tape will really help white people understand what has happened to the Native Americans in Southern California. He wanted to show the tape but there were no facilities to do so. He gave the tape to the Committee members and asked them to look at it. He asked this be a part of the Record. '-" Mr. Ruyle stated he appreciated the comments of the Hellman Property, he doesn't know if the Hellman family has had this property for a hundred years, how much money have they already made out of this land that was taken from Native people, and he doesn't know why even more money needs to be made at the expense of the heritage of Indian people. Mr. Ruyle indicated he has distributed an excerpt from Randall McGuire's article in American Anthropologist, "Archaeology and the First Americans", and read some of those excerpts. A copy of Mr. Ruyle's excerpts is attached to these minutes. Mr. Ruyle stated he felt the Committee has an historic opportunity and a historic obligation to look to the future of archaeology and say this research is not adequate because Indians have not been consulted and fully involved in the process. It cannot be adequate until this is done. This is not something can be done with a few phone calls or a quick walk around the site. It is something that requires a very fundamental commitment to the Indians as human beings. He asked that you look to your historic obligation, and reject this design. There were no other public comments. The Committee members commented next. '-' Member Willey stated she had read the Research Design and all the materials submitted to the Committee. She saw a particular dichotomy forming between dig more and dig less. Looking at the Research Design as a whole, there are many things that you can pick apart - such as using a 114" screen or a W' screen, etc. These technical issues should be determined as they get into it. She described her personal experiences on sites. When looking at the proposed shovel test pits, she noted she has never been comfortable with this procedure but recognized their validity. They would be taking one square foot 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 4 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 '-' ~ excavations, it is not inconsiderable --- not like digging with a trowel. Their plan will, with the number of shovel test pits and test units, excavate approximately 600 square feet on site. This is not too bad. She hoped KEA and Hellman would be flexible enough that if something major showed up it would be addressed. She also liked the use of remote sensing to confirm finds. This has an advantage from the Native American aspect in that if you know an area will be heavily impacted by building, you want to know what's there. If you can find out by a limited amount of excavation, that's better as there will be less destruction. If nothing is done, the site stays intact and the nothing is disturbed, which from some perspectives would be an excellent thing. The reality is the applicant and the City want to develop the site with the least amount of affect. If developed, the sites will be destroyed. The question then becomes to find out as much information as you can to determine the dynamics of that site. Is it truly related to Puvunga? If so, obviously you have ritual significance of high import to Native Americans. At that level, that must be dealt with. If poor archaeology is done on the site and the proper conclusions are not reached --- because the Research Design has been inadequate because we've been trying to destroy too little of it --- then you run the risk you don't understand what this particular site means to the Indians. On the whole, the document, from a technical, archaeological viewpoint, to be quite good in most respects. One technicality, the subject of what are these sites called is of concern. She felt CA-262 is LH-7 and it's where Redwine found it. The other side of that is, we've been calling this northern area site 262. The only way to solve this is for KEA to get together with UCLA and, as a group, decide what it will be called. When KEA does excavate, that will be the definitive designation. The important thing is the information that's derived. She noted the five theoretical questions that relate directly to the approach to the Landing Hill site cover the system. Some of the others are the next level up and a little bit out there. Whether what we get from this site will be able to answer those, is not known. At least the questions are being asked. And that should fulfill the Committee's requirement for theoretical considerations in the design. On the whole, she personally and on a technical level, was relatively pleased with this document. Moira Hahn made useful comments in her first paper and she hoped they would be included. Member Goldberg spoke for a minute, saying she had read the document and was pleased with the Research Design, the the incorporation of many questions form the last meeting. She said the community must realize this land will be developed and that this proposal by the Hellman's is really excellent, when compared with previous proposals. If people will work together and have respect for KEA and their working with Native Americans, this will be a very successful project. '-" Chairperson Johnston asked if Drs. Ruyle, Wilson, and King's comments would be incorporated into the Research Design. She noted they have not been cited. She was concerned because these individuals are highly respected as scholars in their field. They 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 5 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 ...... took their time to write a paper on this and they want to help. She was also concerned about Ora-262, noting Moira Hahn discussed this in her comments. Is it in or out of the project area? This needs to be addressed more fully. She read the City's comments, noting the City indicated they liked the design, but that then there are seven pages of problems and questionss. She said she could not accept the Research Design as it's presented and said it needs some work. She also felt the City did a good job in choosing KEA for the project. The Committee spent a lot of time on the interviews. Member Young indicated the design was fairly good, but that there should be more Native American involvement and the mesh is too big to suit her. ~ Mr. Whittenberg said the Committee has to decide whether to hold another meeting to take additional comments or not. He reviewed the schedule again indicating the revision and the response to comments process. He further indicated the Committee may wish to schedule another meeting to consider the revised Research Design in order to make a recommendation to the City Council as to its adequacy, it will not be to require the document to go back for a re-write. If the Committee stills feels things have not been addressed, the Committee will need to specify those items, and those recommendations would then be considered by the City Council. He said the Archaeology Element of the City's General Plan requires the completed reports regarding the Research Design be given to the City Council two weeks before it can be on their agenda. If staff cannot complete it's work by September 8th, it won't be on the Council's September 22nd agenda, it will be on their first October meeting. Member Johnston said she would like to have the Native American issues addressed more fully. She wanted to have personal consultation with all Native Americans who are concerned. She wanted these consultation meetings made. Jamie Cleland * KEA Environmental Mr. Cleland said his understanding was that the Native American program would go into full gear during the course of the testing. If the Native Americans think they want more input into what's in the Research Design, then that would have to occur now. KEA's assumption was that the Native American concern was most focused on the significance of the sites, what Native American values are there. KEA anticipated the face-to-face consultation occurring in the course of the actual implementation of the evaluation program. They did follow through on their contact of Native Americans as seen on page 15 of the Research Design, and they were seeking input into the Research Design through that phase. KEA does anticipate a much fuller Native American involvement in the actual program itself, rather than in the writing of the Research Design for the program. Chairperson Johnston said she thought the Native Americans would like to be involved in the entire process, from beginning to end. '-" 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 6 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13,1997 .~ Mr. Whittenberg said the City has heard this. The Native Americans have been provided copies of the Research Design document, copies of the agendas for the meetings, copies of staff reports, and the City's comments on the Research Design document, and Ms. Hahn's comments from the last meeting regarding the Research Design. The purpose of the Research Design is to put forth how test excavations are to occur, that is the basic purpose of a research design. The purpose is not to do with ethnographic studies. That is being done over and above the Research Design process itself. As part of the reports that will be prepared, based on any future test excavations that may occur on the property, part of that reporting program will include the ethnographic information, in consultation with the Native Americans regarding significance of the area. The Committee must keep in mind that the law requires the Research Design to have one very specific function --- to indicate how field investigation is to occur. Chairperson Johnston said she understood that is a law but when dealing with human beings, ethically, the Native Americans want to be involved from the beginning to the end. '--' Mr. Whittenberg said this has been done. Again, the Research Design document was provided to all those individuals --- this is something the city normally does not do. It was provided by mail to them, along with a request for them to comment on it. The City has sent them agenda's for both the August 6 meeting and this meeting, so they were knew the dates and times of those meetings. The City has actively sought their involvement. This can been seen by the people who are present tonight and who were present at the last meeting. Eugene Ruyle Mr. Ruyle said he is neither an archaeologist nor a lawyer, he has tried to understand CEQA as best he can. But he is an ethnographer, being trained as a social anthropologist and ethnographer. One cannot do a two-week or a two-month ethnography. A fundamental feature of ethnography as a discipline is that a long-term period of residence and inter-action be established with the people who are to be studied. Nothing must be done to disturb or hurt these people. Trust is crucial. To hear that the ethnography will be done quickly, after we've decided to destroy the sites really offends him as an anthropologist. Given the heritage of mis-trust that has developed in Southern California between Native people and archaeologists, Diana Wilson has spent years building relationships with Native people, and is trusted because of that. You cannot do a scientifically credible piece of ethnography in two weeks or two months. ~ Mr. Whittenberg asked the Committee to decide on two matters: (1) whether or not to continue this meeting to another date between now and September 1 st to receive additional public comments on KEA's Research Design;and (2) to schedule a meeting on August 27th to review the cultural resources portions of the Hellman Specific Plan Final EIR. The document should be printed tomorrow and it will be distributed Friday or Monday. The Committee is required to review the Cultural Resources portions of that document and 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 7 Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 ~ forward recommendations to the Planning Commission as to its adequacy, the mitigation measures and its relation to CEQA. In response to a question from Member Willey, Mr. Whittenberg advised the Committee on what he thought the Planning Commission would do and urged them to hold another meeting on August 27th to discuss the Cultural Resources Section of the Final EIR. MOTION by Willey; SECOND by Goldberg to continue this meeting to August 27, 1997 at 5:30 p.m. to consider the Cultural Resources Section of the Final EIR. MOTION CARRIED: 4-0-1 AYES: NOES: ABST AIN: ABSENT: Goldberg, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Johnston None None Fitzpatrick MOTION by Goldberg; SECOND by Willey to not continue consideration of the Research Design. '-' MOTION CARRIED: 4-0-1 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Goldberg, Willey, Young, and Chairperson Johnston None None Fitzpatrick COMMITTEE CONCERNS - None STAFF CONCERNS - None ADJOURNMENT There being no objections, Chairperson Johnston adjourned the meeting at 6:37 p.m. (d5~ /' Chairperso Archaeological Advisory Committee '-' 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 8 '-, '-' ...... Archaeological Advisory Committee Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 1997 ~pt~ Whittenberg, Secretary Archaeological AdVIsory Comnuttee Note: These Minutes are tentative until approved by the Archaeological Advisory Committee. The Archaeological Advisory Committee Minutes of August 13, 1997 were approved on Oe:Prb??SE7c J7 ,1997. 08-13-97 Minutes.doc 9 ~ NOTICE OF ADJOURNED MEETING ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ~ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ADJOURNED MEETING OF AUGUST 13, 1997 HAS BEEN ADJOURNED TO WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1997, AT 5:30 P.M. AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 211 EIGHTH STREET, SEAL BEACH August 14. 199} Date '-' C:\My Documents\ARCHCOMM\Adjoumed Meeting Notice 7.doc\LW\08-14-97