The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBolsa Chica Regional Park - Archeological Finds and Historic B'Y CITY COUNCIL CIL — Q ��lP V � 19 CD94-73 -� - - REQUEST-FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: September 19, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD 94-73 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Subject: BOLSA CHICA REGIONAL PARK--GAS PLANT SITE PRESENTATION BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE Consistent with Council Policy? [XI Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: uAiy S;v o&V► ,f b unc 1 ; STATEMENT OF ISSUE• �"Cz� —yes Rabu`e Al�os P 9 --)' ,;r"11"Va k7- Ala The County of Orange, Department of Harbors, Beaches and Parks, is seeking the City Councils support of the County's plan to incorporate select elements of the gas plant site as an educational and historical feature of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park. The County will be attending the meeting to present the specific details of the plan. Transmitted for the City Council's review and support is the proposed plan for preservation of specific gas plant elements for incorporation in the Bolsa Chica Regional Park. RECOMMENDATION• Staff Recommendation: Receive the County's presentation on its plan for preservation of specific elements of the gas plant and provide feedback as to whether or not the Council supports the plan. ANALYSIS: On January 12, 1994, a joint meeting between the City of Huntington Beach Community Services Commission, Historic Resources Board and Allied Arts Board, the three groups each acted to support the concept of retaining elements of the gas plant for incorporation in the Bolsa Chica Regional Park. In March of this year, the City Council acted to extend the gas plant operations to provide the County additional time to explore this concept. The County has further analyzed the concept and has developed a plan identifying the details and specific elements to be preserved as a historical and interpretive feature of the park. • Staff has not yet seen the plans; however, the County will be at the September 19, 1994, meeting to present this plan for the City Council's review. The County is seeking support from the City Council to pursue implementation of the plan. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter from Bob Fisher, Director Harbors, Beaches and Parks, dated September 7, 1994. MTU:MSF:JO:lp RCA-9/19/94 2 (CD94-73) ATTACHMENT 1 FROM:EMA HBP DIRECTOR • TO: 374 1540 • SEP 7, 1994 2:57PM P.01 MICHAEL M.RUANE DIRECTOR,EMA Q U NTY O F DIRECTOR OF HARBORS,BEACHES 8 PARKS 2 I LOCATION: s 3 300 FOURTH FLOOR SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY P.O.BOX 4048 HARBORS,BEACHES AND PARKS SANTA ANA,CA 92702.4048 TELEPHONE: (714)834.ON7 September 7, 1994 FAX N$34.4744 Me. Melanie Fallon, Director Community Development City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 subject; Bolsa Chica Regional Park Gas Plant Site Dear Ms. Fallon: This is to request an item regarding the subject project be placed on the September 19th City Council meeting agenda. The purpose of this item is to provide the City Council information on, and (hopefully) gain Council support for, our proposal to plan for the preservation of selected elements of the gas plant as an educational and historical feature in Bolsa Chica Regional Park. On January 12, 2994, in a joint meeting of the Community Services Commission, Historic Resources Board and the Allied Arts Board, the concept of retaining selected elements of the gas plant facility for historical and interpretive value was endorsed. On March 7, 1994, the Council agreed to extend the gas plant operation to provide additional time for the County and City to further explore this concept. By October 1, 1994, the County is required to provide Shell Western BOP, Inc. a proposal that details the specific elements to be preserved. we would like to present this plan to the Council and receive comments. Please give me a call if you have any questions regarding this matter. very tzul yours t Robert G. Fisher, Director Harbors, Beaches and Parks ST/JS:pr - - 40133013265631 Post-It-Fax Note 7871 Date From Dl JlQi�i Go./OeD1. _ Co. ft Phone r Phone Q.3 ✓✓ (, {o - AU- 11 '=4 11!2EAM SUP HARE__7T w:EDER P i HARRMTT M. 'NrIEDER _ MWOCOVI*qM, 15CCOND DISTRICT ONANOL COUNTY HAIL Of ADMINISTRATION y 10 CIVIC CtNTCR PLAZA,}r,0 DOX 687. SANTA ANA,CALITORN,A 08703-080V- !� PNON[ (7-A) 434-3680 FAX (714) 634-4109 F € --. z August 10. 1 W ^' rn v m< {71 n n G � n 7•� The Honorable Unda Moulton-Patterson MayoCl ail L 2000 Main Street P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Dear Mayor Moulton-Patterson; The long-awaited response to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the Bola Chica has now been completed. I know that you, as the Mayor of untinpton Beach, and the members of the clty.Counoll are vitally Interested in the future of this precious resource, For that reason, I would like to ask your help In soheduunp a study session prior to the oouncil meeting on Monday, August 16, 1994, I have asked Tom Mathews, the County's Director of Planning, and appropriate ocunty staff, to prepared to fully brief the counoll on the Information contained In the docurnen Linda, I appreciate your help In setting up the study session, The Bolsa Chica�t r,'°W responee will be released to the public late Monday afternoon and I believe th�ot and the oounall should have accurate, comply information on the documentmeont ThanR you for your l r O eadership on this matter, I look forward to seeing you on i�nd$y. In the interim Sandra Ward, of my staff, Is available to asWat you, should you d anything additional from the County. Sincerely, V HARRIETT M. WIEDE Supervisor, Second District HMW;swc snn Q ESSI � 006-A%1"A-CYPAM•OARDL'N ORCM•N1oN7iNOTON S ACH•La ALAMMS g 64mooA•NAN"A ANA.IM.ski•ITANTON•8~ssah li U-1 14 -14 Idd:Ub K#HHM/HUE • lby F'lJ5 Humtln n Beach omorrow BMW Rwvftalm Beadx G 92648 August 11 , 1994 Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach , CA 92646 Honorable Mayor and City Council : Huntington Beach Tomorrow wishes request that the City Council take emergency action at its next meeting on August 15th to 1 ) request that Orange County Environmental Management Agency ( OCEMA) set the period for public comment to 90 days for the Solsa Chica Environmental Impact Report (BCEIR) projected for release as early as next week . 2 ) in the event that the OCEMA will not set a 90Wday review period for the BCEIR , request that Supervisor Harriet Wieder intercede to have such a period set _ Since the August 15th meeting agenda has already been adopted and published, we realize that this will require a motion for emergency action as well as an affirmative vote to adopt such an action on your part . We believe, as indicated below , that such emergency action is fully warranted and necessary to set the process for time extension in motion as soon as possible . Currently available information indicates that the OCEMA intends to adopt a 45-day review period for the BCEIR . Our most recent information indicates that the Huntington Beach Community Services Oepartment apparently intends to request a 60-day review period. While we applaud Community Services' attempt to extend the review period , we do not believe that even 60-days is an adequate review period. The following are our primary reasons fo1~ requesting the 90--day period for review: 1 . What happens in the Bolse Chica area , even though most of the area is presently unincorporated, will profoundly affect the quality of life in Huntington Beach forever . 2 . The current plan of the landowner/developer is to process the project through the County . Because of the millions of dollars of associated present and future fee losses and the anticipation of continued demands on this city's already overloaded infrastructure and services , the protect currently preferred by the proponent has the potential of further severely degrading the quality of life of the residents in this city . 1 57TUPY . 1 I.IC,I 14 '14 {fit:Jdb K or �/I-iC�t � 16y h'bb �. 3. At present , this EIR will provide the only foreseeable opportunity to comment on the whole project as an entity in an attempt to foresee , forestall and mitigate individual and interrelated effects and impacts of the preferred or alternate projects . 4 _ City staff has indicated ( Item E-13 , RCA-8/15/94 , CD94-65 on the August 15th , 1994 ) that they believe the revised EIR will essentially be a new EIR and will require a level of review similar to that which was required for the previous version_ Mr . Paul Lanning , OCEMA has indicated (Huntington Beach Independent , August 11 , 1994 , page 1 ) that the project is a large and complex project and the whole purpose of the EIR is to solicit comments and see if revisions need to be considered. In the same newspaper report on the forthcoming EIR ( Ibid. ), Koll Senior Vice President Lucy Dunn has indicated- ( ibid. ) that for "something as large as the Bolsa Chica , ybu want to do it right" . All of these comments together with the experience of members of Huntington Beach Tomorrow and many other citizens who reviewed the first version combine to indicate that a 90-day period for review is much more realistic than the either a 45- or a 60-day period . Thank you for your consideration of our comments in this matter and your continued efforts on behalf of the quality of life and the citizens in this city . Sincerely , obert E . Winchell For the Board of Directors and Members Huntington Beach Tomorrow 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION �HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Connie Brockway, City Clerk C'i e SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica Letter from Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder to the Orange County Planning Commission dated February 9, 1994 DATE: February 14, 1994 Attached is another letter received today from Supervisor Harriett Wieder regarding the Bolsa Chica EIR public hearing process. CB:j h Enclosure cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator . Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development Gail Hutton, City Attorney v HARRIETT M. WIEDER SUPERVISOR. SECOND DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION • 10 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA.P.O.DOX 687. SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA 92702-0687 PHONE (714) 834-3220 FAX (714) 834.6109 February 9, 1994 Mr. E. Chuck McBurney Chaifman Orange County Planning Commission 300 N. Flower 3rd Floor, Room 315 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Dear Mr. Mc ne At the request of the Huntington Beach City Council and In an effort to ensure maximum public participation in the public hearing process for the Bolsa Chica project, I am writing to request that the Orange County Planning Commission hold one of its hearings on the Bolsa Chica Project in the City of Huntington Beach. 1 believe that a hearing in Huntington Beach is in the best Interest of the community and the public hearing process. In this manner, we can ensure that the Planning Commission has the benefit of testimony from citizens and special interest groups that have been so devoted to the Bolsa Chica. While not common, it Is my understanding that this action is not precedent-setting and public hearings have on occasion been held in other locations. Given the extraordinary public Interest In this project and my efforts to reach agreement on the vital issue of restoration of the Bolsa Chica, i appreciate your favorable consideration of my request. Sincerely, HARRIETT M.WIEDER Supervisor, Second District HMW:kc cc: Tom Mathews, EMA COSTA 6034-CYPRESS•GARDEN DRONE-HUNTMGTON BEACH•LOS ALAMITOS•ROSSMOOR•SANTA ANA•SEAL BEACH-STMnXW•"JSEi r BEACH CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Connie Brockway,City Clerk C SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica Letter from Supervisor Harriett M.Wieder Dated February 9, 1994 DATE: February 10, 1994 Attached is a letter received today from Supervisor Harriett Wieder regarding the Bolsa Chica EIR public hearing process. The copies sent to me from the Supervisor's Office to distribute to you were all accidentally addressed to Councilmember Sullivan and that is why you do not each have an individual letter. CB.jh Enclosure cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development Gail Hutton, City Attorney BOLSAEIR bcc: Mike Adams HARRIETT 3I. WIEDER f . SUPERVISOR. SECOND DISTRICT -� ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION _ • 10 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA,P-O.BOX 687. SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA 92702-0687 PHONE (714) 834-3220 FAX (714) 834-6109 February 9, 1994 The Honorable Dave Sullivan Councilman City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, 92648 Dear Councilm Thank you for your letter of January 28, 1994 regarding the public hearing process applicable to the Balsa Chica Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Although it might not be apparent, we do share the desire to provide the people of Huntington Beach every opportunity to comment on the EIR. However, I remain concerned that the limited experience of the Huntington Beach City Council in addressing documents as complex as the Bolsa Chica EIR have lead to some unfortunate misunderstandings. As you well know, the County also desires public input into this important issue. We anticipate the written transcript of the testimonies provided at the January 31, 1994 public meeting. This input into the public review process will allow us to respond to all the comments received. Furthermore, because public comment is so important, I have directed the County Planning Commission to hold a public hearing in Huntington Beach after the close of the EIR comment and response period. I anticipate this hearing will take place in May 1994, at which time all interested parties will be invited to testify on the proposed project. It is my hope that the presentation made by Mr. Tom Mathews of the County's Environmental Management Agency (EMA) at your January 31, 1994 public meeting has since clarified the County's complex EIR process for you and your fellow council members. However, in the unfortunate event that questions remain on the County's EIR process and intent for public input, I would like to invite you and two other council members to meet with EMA staff in my office within the next two weeks. In this manner, we can put any confusion to rest and move forward together on the important work of the restoration of the Bolsa Chica. Please let my office know when you or other members of the council, as designated by the Mayor, would be available to meet. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, ( HARRIETT M.WIEDER Supervisor, Second District cc: Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson Huntington Beach City Council Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, Chairman of the Board Tom Mathews, EMA COSTA MESA•CYPRESS•GARDEN GROVE•HUNTINGTON BEACH•LOS ALAMITOS•ROSSMOOR•SANTA ANA•SEAL BEACH•STANTON•SUNSET BEACFI H-ITEMS 2/22/94 Council meeting Councilman Bauer V..w==W 1. Rebroadcast of Special Council Meetings and Council Study Sessions. 2. Action on the archeological findings in the Bolsa Chica. �.JAN-26-1994 21:50 FROM ADSTONE INTL TO 93741557 P.02 Contact: Lucy Duna �vJn , 46 CW~� r 77 IColl Real Estate Group `L (714) 374 2477 4 FACT SHEET Archeological Excavations at Bolsa Chlca Q: How long have archeological excavations been going on at Bolsa Chiea Men? A: Several archeology sites on Bolsa Chic&Mesa have been subject to study and excavation since the 1970s. The most recent excavations, which are the subject of the newspaper articles, were initiated in the summer of 1992. The excavations were conducted on one of the sites (ORA-83)by Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc., under the direction of Dr. Nancy A. Whitney-Desautels. All of the work done by SRS, Inc. has been reviewed by an cq=t team of peer reviewers, comprised of three of the state's most distinguished archaeologists. Q: Were human bone fragments discovered at this site? When were they discovered? A: Yes. Human bone fragments have been discovered at this site by the archeological consultants as early as fall, 1992. At the time of their discovery however, the fragments were isolated—not discovered in the context of related human bone fragments. Mor ,ver, the archeologist uncovered both human and animal bone fragments and at the time of discovery did not have sufficient information to determine what was what. The bone fiagments were sent to UCLA for A then examination to determine which fragments were human and which were animal. Results of the UCLA studies were not made available until 1993. Q: What action did Dr. Desautels take upon receiving results of the UCLA studles9.. A: Once Dr. Desautels had confirmation that the bone fragments she discovered were human, she notified the coroner's office as required by state law. Judy Suchey was hired by the coroner's office to investigate the report, and her report to the coroner was the document discussed in the news articles. Neither Dr. Desautels nor Koll Real Estate Group were aware of Judy Suchey's report or were provided with a copy of the report until it was given to the company by newspaper reporters. 2213 Miin Street SZ;te 3? Hunanston 13wch,G142648 (714)374 2477 ? 1: OMAS P PPLIN STEW4 A IACO-I h1 't i AOeERT E CALUwAN .ATw1EEN ►AQNE . • �—N L.I A 1-1_,� IM CHISOUCAS .TI11A PAONE�� ._Q. - SUSAN K HORI• QANIEL K Wg1TON „ `I(•1 1U I J m RA YMONO KING RENE E `{•+,` JOHN LEHR•• IEBMTN fit-l.TO N %LSO ADMsrtEO M 7Sraw•'r L LAWYERS :JLUM&A =L50 AOwrrED M4 NEW•^er - .x,t„'- July 27, 1992 = Ms. Cinch M. Alvitre Gabrielino Tribal Council 2462 Avocado Riverside, California 92507 : t Re: Bolsa China Archaeology '' -. . Dear Cinch: is- - Following up on our recent telephone conversa1: ns, I have compiled some information for you regarding the Bolsa China archaeological sues. First,I am enclosing a copy of the.most recent draft of the Reburial Agreement for your review. I hope that some of the changes which have been made address your concerns. The revised agreement provides for reburial; on the Huntington Mesa on the Bolsa China property. It also clarifies the hold harmless` provision. As we discussed, we wish to avoid the situation where we have arranged to..,. rebury t he artifacts and human bone fragments in accordance with your wishes, but then are faced with other Native Americans claiming to be the most likely descendants and who hold up resolution of these issues. In the event that occurs, the agreement.asks that you and David Belardes resolve the issue of most likely descendants and appropriate representation among the tribal members and that the landowner not get involved in having to choose l between one representative or another. ' Sewnd, I have enclosed maps of the site showing the location of the various archaeological sites. The site that is currently being excavated is ORA-83. As you know, other sites on Bolsa Chica Mesa have already been fully excavated and mitigated(ORA-289,ORA 78,and ORA-85). Raymond Belardes served as the Native American monitor on all of those excavations. No human remains were found during the course of any of the excavations. All of the material which was recovered, i.e., shells, beads, etc. are in the possession of the °. landowner or the archaeological consultant. o�2:s2�say 1 00 VC-N KARMAN • '?!h FLO TI a.IP:F ALIF09NIA 02715 • 71•1 Q55.2211c) . c :: -•�1S5 9M POST i1Fr''( F a(-••., —,11 . -P%Irjc .:LIFOPNIA • •-•� :1�10 42 Ms. Cindi Alvitre July 27, 1992 1. Page 2 . -•:. .. :mot` Third, you asked about the status of the environmental impact report for the project. The•:';;`= City of Huntington Beach and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are jointly preparing environmental impact statement/environmental impact report(EIS/EIR) for the project as the project includes both the annexation of the property to the City and approval of a local a h: coastal program as well as the issuance of a Section 404 permit by the Corps to conduct"_.j:: :� work in waters of the United States. The City Corps and Co s have estimated that the Draft' 4 EIS/EIR will be published sometime in August 1992. I will see to it that you receive a copy ' for your review, ' Fourth, you asked about the ownership of the property. The property is owned by tfid_-.: Signal Bolsa Corporation. Signal Bolsa Corporation is a wholly-owned subsidiary of_.9k corporation known as the Bolsa Chica Corporation. The Chief Executive Officer of the:: Bolsa Chica Corporation is Michael Dingman. Because the Bolsa Chica Corporation is headquartered on the East Coast, the Bolsa Chica Corporation has hired The Kolb. " Company, an Orange County-based development company to oversee the day-to-day . .- management of the project. The Chief Executive Officer of The Koll Company is Donald ... Koll. 'Ile President of The Koll Company is Ray Wirta and the President for Southern 't..� California Operations, under whose direction the Bolsa Chica project falls is Richard Ortwein. The project manager for the Bolsa Chica project is Lucetta Dunn who is Senior ' P j 8 P j ��,... Vice President of The Koll Company. (Ms. Dunn was formerly an officer and general __.. counsel to the Signal Bolsa Corporation.) Assisting Ms. Dunn in managing the project is =:. Mr. Larry Brose, Vice President of The Koll Company. i In terms of the archaeology issues, Ms. Dunn will be the signatory on the reburial agreement for The Koll Company and the Bolsa Chica Corporation. The agreement . = ' negotiations and any issues arising in connection with the archaeological work, such as the retention of a Native American Monitor, will be handled by Mr. Brose or myself.Therefore, t; if you have any questions regarding the project or The Koll Company's involvement, please feel free to contact either Mr. Brose at 833-3030 or me. If you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact either of us. After you have completed vour review of the enclosed materials, and have had an opportunity to discuss these issues with members of your tribal council and ' t 177M 15006.1 Ms. Cindi Alvitre �► July 27, 1992 Page 3 David Belardes or Phil Ibanez, we would like to meet with you and Mr. Belardes to finaliie the agreement and discuss any other issues that you or he may have with respect to the: excavations. i •ti Very truly yours, ; '- t__ Susan K. Hori _ Enclosures cc: David Belardes (w/enclosures) Nancy A. Whitney-Desautels. Ph.D. (w/reburial agreement) }: Lucy Dunn (w/reburial agreement) ` y • Darlene A. Shelley (w/reburial agreement) A 072292 1 SCAA 1 • .+ .i i - July _, 1992 Ms. Cindi M. Alvitre Gabrielino Tribal Council 3462 Avocado Riverside, California 92507 ':'•y'r Mr. David Belardes Juaneno Band of Mission Indians 31742 Via Belardes t San Juan Capistrano, California 92675 Re: Agreement Regarding Reburial of Isolated Human Bone Fragments from ORA-83, Bolsa Chica Dear Ms. Alvitre and Mr. Belardes: When accepted by you, as the authorized representatives of the Gabrielino Tribal Council and the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Native Americans") as provided below. this letter shall constitute an agreement ("Agreement")between the Native Americans and Signal Bolsa Corporation as landowner, and The Koll Company as managing agent for Signal Bolsa Corporation (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Owners") regarding the treatment and reburial of the isolated fragments of human bone and any associated grave goods discovered during the course . of archaeological investigations at Bolsa Chica Mesa (hereinafter "Bolsa Chica") of the Bolsa Chica property owned by Owners and located in unincorporated Orange County. i The isolated human bone fragments and associated grave goods were discovered rng archaeological investigations conducted by Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc. ("SRS"), consultant to Owners. The archaeological investigations were monitored by Raymond Belardes of the Coastal Juaneno Band of Mission Indians from June. 1990, until June. 1992. when he was replaced by Phil Ibanez of the Luiseno Tribe. Both of t REPORT CONCERNING THE ARCHEOLOGICAL ASPECT OF THE BOLSA CHICA DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PUBLISHED BY THE COUNTY OF ORANGE RECM 1� A ?#OJECT E 551 PART OF THE RECORD AT, rR� i Ralph Bauer-2/22/94 MEETING INTRODUCTION ITEM NO. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK The primary issue currently at hand i;W%Whe Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)concerning the Bolsa Chica,published by the County of Orange in late December, 1993, as County project number 551. The County of Orange as lead agency on this project,as well as the City of Huntington Beach as a responsible agency,both have an obligation to maintain the integrity of the EIR process.Both of these agencies have jurisdiction over this project as provided by the California Environmental Quality Act. It is as an official of the City of Huntington Beach that I am writing this report. Parenthetically,I should note that the focus of this report is local and state regulations not Federal regulations. Since the area under consideration,the Bolsa Chica,is in part defined as "waters of the United States,"the Federal government,through its lead agency on this project, the Army Corps of Engineers,also has jurisdiction over parts of the Bolsa Chica. Further, since there are archeological and cultural dimensions to the Bolsa Chica which concern Native Americans,other Federal agencies may also have jurisdiction. Although this report will not focus on Federal aspects of the Bolsa Chica,it is hoped that the Army Corps of Engineers and other concerned Federal agencies will review this report to make certain that Federal laws,rules, regulations,procedures,and policies are being followed. One major aspect of the DEIR is concerned with the archeological and cultural environment of the Bolsa Chica. Although there are many dimensions to the DEIR,the writer has focused on this aspect of it for three primary reasons. 1. The archeological and cultural aspects of the Bolsa Chica,especially those having to do with human remains,are sacred to Native Americans and should be treated with care and dignity. 2. The archeological aspects of the Bolsa Chica having to do with the everyday living of Native Americans going back at least 8,000 years is of great scientific,as well as public interest, since it can establish a history of Native Americans relatively close to the time when these peoples migrated across the Bering Straits. All aspects of their life style should be examined I by scientific investigators whose whose competence is well recognized. This of course must be done in a way which preserves the dignity of all native Americans and their ancestors. 3. For purposes of maintaining the integrity of the EIR,it is important that a base line is established. Thus, in so far as possible,it is important that the DEIR examine all artifacts which exist and all activities which have taken place in the Bolsa Chica from the time it was in its _ pristine state,until the publishing of the DEIR in late December of 1993. This base line will then permit us to objectively examine activities which are continuing on the site as well as to examine the impact of the proposed project in the site. One may ask why give the archeological and cultural aspect such special focus. The answer is simple. We are dealing with the lives of our fellow human beings. I am sure that all of us would like our forefathers'remains and their culture to be treated with dignity and care wherever they may exist. OTHER STATE AGENCIES In addition to the County of Orange and the City of Huntington Brach,there are other state agencies which either have jurisdiction here or are repositories of information about the Bolsa Chica: These include: The California State Coastal Commission The Native American Heritage Commission The State Historical Resources Commission The Office of Historic Preservation The Archeological Information Center at U.C.L.A. (a repository for archeological information about sites in Orange County) It is hoped that these organizations will be involved in an appropriate way to provide information and make sure laws,rules,regulations,procedures,and policies have been adhered to with regards to the Bolsa Chica. -2- ARCHEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFORMATION RECEIVED Although there may be a number of sites involved which are significant in the archeological and cultural aspects of the Bolsa Chica,the primary focus of this report is a site known as ORA 83 (Enclosures 1 &2). The reason for this is that substantial information has been received with regards to the presence of multiple human remains,while the DEIR refers to the site as having no reported human remains(Enclosure 3)(table 4, 11,2,pg. 4.11-9 of the DEIR). We are concerned that such a significant error makes the archeological and cultural analysis in the DEIR suspect in all respects. To repeat,the DEIR indicates no human remains have been reported at the ORA 83 site as of the publication date of the DEIR in late December 1993. The evidence which belies this,all of which was available prior to that date,is as follows: 1. A report from Judy Myers Suchey Ph.D, Forensic Archeologist who observed skeletal materials at ORA 83 on 10/12/93 (Enclosure 4). 2. A Coroner's report shows that human bones were reported to the Coroner from ORA 83 on 9/30/93 (Enclosure 5). Evidence for human remains were reported by observers on the site in mid-summer 1990(Enclosure 6 Observer A),during the summer of 1992(July,Observer B, Enclosure 7), in October 1992(Observer B,Enclosure 8),in August and September 1993 (Observer B,Enclosure 9), in September 1993 (Observer B,Enclosure 10). 4. A map showing the presence of 25 burial sites dated 8/25/93 (Enclosure 11). 5. The developer reports finding bone fragments in early fall 1992(Enclosure 12). These were apparently not reported to the Coroner as provided by law, since a screening of Coroner records back to January 1, 1990 shows the only report of bone fragments on ORA 83 was made on 9/30/93,over a year after the discovery(Enclosure 13). Interestingly,the developer says in a Los Angeles Times article dated 2/13/94,that bones on ORA 83 were reported to the Coroner in June of 1992,when according to Coroner records there was no such report(Enclosure 14). 6. A letter(Enclosure 15)from a former Signal Landmark employee(Signal Landmark was a predecessor to the present developer,Koll Real Estate Group)which indicates that the employee saw a company memo during August 1990 which allegedly said that human remains had been unearthed in the Bolsa Chica. The memo allegedly said that removal of all human remains should be completed in a week because if interested parties,particularly Native Americans,ever got wind of this find there might be an indefinite delay and perhaps no further development of the property. The writer understands that some employees from the time of the memo are currently employed by the Koll Real Estate Group. -3- PRIMARY ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED The above information raises a number of issues which need resolution: 1. Why was significant information concerning human remains on ORA 83 left out of the County DEIR? This is of special concern since much of the information quoted herein was available from the County Corner,a fellow agency to that issuing the DEIR. 2. Why were human remains,apparently found in June of 1992 or before,not reported until September of 1993 even though the law requires 24 hour notification to the Coroner after . discovery? It should be noted that the Native American Heritage Commission was apparently also not notified in a timely manner. 3. Was there an attempt to circumvent the system and its definition of proper handling of human remains,thereby speeding up the development of the Bolsa Chica. SECONDARY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED 1. Have proper procedures been followed in the examination of all archeological sites in the Bolsa Chica? This includes,but is not limited to,keeping of daily logs,proper preservation, and disposition of all artifacts and writing of timely reports(Enclosure 16). 2. Should ORA 83 be designated as a cemetery(more than six burial sites)and remain as a permanent installation. 3. Has the selection of all firms and individuals working and monitoring the Bolsa Chica been made against past performance,high scientific integrity,and a broad cultural sensitivity. Have their activities been monitored by appropriate State agencies on a regular basis? 4. Should the Archeological Information Center of U.C.L.A.be contacted to receive the extensive information about the Bolsa Chica for possible inclusion in the EIR? 5. Should the Bolsa Chica be placed on the National Register of Historic Places as was previously recommended? 6. Should there be better legislation which protects archeological sites like the Bolsa Chica and which prescribes an arms length relationship between firms as well as monitors and the developers wishing to build on a archeological sensitive site. For example, should the selection process be made by a disinterested third party against a set of criteria which are high in scientific integrity and broad cultural awareness and sensitivity. Should such firms and monitors report to the State,be paid by the State,and then have the developer reimburse the State for all costs? -4- I SUGGESTED ACTION TO RESOLVE THE ARCHEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL ISSUES OF THE BOLSA CHICA When a public official receives information as prescribed herein it is his or her obligation to re- evaluate it and to take action to get to the truth of the matter. It is also that officials obligation to take steps to see if any laws have been broken and to see to it that proper procedures are followed for activities under his or her jurisdiction. In the case of the Bolsa Chica,there have been a number of allegations.many of which have to do with the integrity of the DEIR. Unfortunately,an individual Councilmember has neither the investigative expertise,the power to question a witness under oath,or the availability to subpoena records. As one reviews the options that are available one immediately comes to the conclusion that the County Grand Jury is an appropriate vehicle for a investigation since they have the power to determine the truth of the matter,to determine if procedures have been followed,and to make recommendations for improvements in the system which could be the basis of future legislation. They also operate independent of political pressure and they may take testimony in secret. As a reminder,it should be noted that the County Grand Jury has both a criminal and civil function. All of the items in this report are intended to fall into the Grand Jury's purview, in civil not criminal matters. In closing, it should be mentioned that in discussing the contents of this report with a number of potential witnesses,these individuals indicated that they would testify under oath if subpoenaed, but would reveal no more than they had already said. This is another compelling reason for Grand Jury investigation of this matter. RECONEWENDATIONS To assure this Council of honesty and integrity in dealing with the archeological and cultural aspects of the Bolsa Chica I propose three motions: 1. I move that the Huntington Beach City Count}I r DWA ` request to investigate all archeological and cultu' a olsa Chita to a)assure integrity of the DEIR for the Bolsa Chica;b)make certain all laws,procedures,rules,regulations and policies have been followed and;c)make recommendations to improve the system used to investigate and preserve archeological sites. -5- Z. I move that the Huntington Beach City Council contact the Coastal Commission, send them the appropriate information and have them determine whether any permits they may have issued should remain in force or be rescinded. 3. I move that the Huntington Beach City Council contact the Native American Heritage Commission,the State Historical Resources Commission,and the office of Historic Preservation, send them the appropriate information and have them determine whether all procedures required by the State have been and will continue to be followed. Further,I move that these agencies be requested to continue to monitor all activities in the Bolsa Chica having to do with archeological and cultural aspects of the site. RB:paj DEIR -6- 62="2 LEGEND Huntington r MARINE/TIDAL INFLUENCE Central Park�9t�j ..... PRI IARY DRAINAGE COURSES D� Masonary Wall— SEASONAL POND Springdale '- _ — Fdwards Thumb MWD <''j t Pump Station . s Area Huntington TIDE GATE �� '��a,�,• Reach Mesa FLAP GATE '�►,1 ;.R 3 OCO North Bolsa --� r..t� �;.+�i;t;.^. ,,,•,... 'fa:tk Farm No n. EARTHEN BERM llandlirg Site Bolsa Chi BLUFF FACE 4Loa and Bolsa Chica ' 7S Mesa — " East Garden Grove `�� i Pi`ni r:�s i NIWD AREA / Upper Bench Wintersbur; flood �- �. ry / Control Channel �hannc{ ' (�00 S�nrth FL+Iss I c Qo�sa/i/� 'lank (�srn � / • Lowland Pocket / Bolsa Chica Mesa — LowerBench S ` i! Q. j^ii;i 13olsa Chica DFG Cell -F)ite / I:colopical Reserve Eucaly'ptus Groves :?;r�^ 'fjtl :;:f'ja.j�: ILI -`,,�R� r�a■� %Y �111nt1t1ytQllS^c1C11 i Coijntty Clot) lsjanif i, Fielipsd Ouit: AdIsa$a F s� I I I I I I I I I I I I.Whipstock Oil\Veils ;:;k C--t H00121 •� 8 rnnrK cant Wth-21 Inner Bolsa Bay � Bolsa Chica State Beach � Bolsa Chica Study Area Boundary FEET 00f ° Wo 1WO VIEWSHED PHOTO LOCATIONS Source: Dolea Chica Local Coastal Program by Malkoff do Associates FIGURE,, K-1 • 1125—�Ij toll • •• �. of OL r ' ,.� .� - dam¢ , c ' • • i`% ''+ --ram-.. t�" . toOP 0 Poem i I � . , .�. , 1 • / •, I -+�MAl1.a+�4p1vJM. •�MIMML`�. .., .. ../.'7''�NM••.• .�t.+dLNw-. . . . •i• • Table 4.112 BOLSA CHICA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES SUMMARY &draaw Carton 14 D1119 CA-ORA-ft Na. Site Sae (lhsnrtnelsd Ap Aretaealsgloal Faahns Htson Remahn IiaisffaZ impacts Jolt) yan BJP.1 BC INaa 11tn ORA-78 61.OW NOW H.LH? Shen,anthrosols,We Scatter,Bohn Chia Oun None B,fi3O,Pt,Sant R. Club and WWH bransdam ORA4WI44 30,000 106 dabs ron4hw H,M,I 'Coifed Slone Site,'atoll eb.FAR.abundant Now reported B,E,O,L,P,and R. Erom W00•iS00 artifacts.anthroadN awl WWD IaSbnSdoa ORA4MrJf9 I8.000 S dew renfirrf M,1 Anthrosols,abundant shall.aNfacta None reported B,E,O,L?.O,P,and R. honor 4700.4120 ORA45 22,000 S dam nnfinB H.M.1. Anthrosols,abundant artifacts,numerous scofacb; Human bona noted B,E,O,L?,P,and R. ♦. from 41 W-33f0 NO and WWII Installation. ORA-96 23,000 Nee M.1 Shell Seamen,poundSbrts Nose reported B,E.O,P,R ORA-288 Destroyed Nan M Anthrosols,Shell salter Nons reported Totally destroyed HS men Sites ORA42 30,000 46 dabs raafinf M. 1 Shell scatter,FAR,andrrosde,and abundant 13 burials B,E,O,L?,O,P,and R. from SM900 artifacts. i ORA-ff 50.000 19 data carrel H,M? Anthrosok,shall seattar,FAR.dsbitafa, Noe reported B4O,O,P?.and R. from SMS-1400 froundstore;hislork dMkg apipmis t. • ORA-290 Deed Nan P Shell Selmer None sported ' Totally destroyed ORA-291 2,300 Nan M,1,LH Anthrosols,abundant shall,scofaets,FAR, None reported B.E,and P? artifacts. 1 ORA 292 3.2W Nara P Anthrosols,shell scatter,FAR,debibps, None reported B,(i?,P,and R. froundetons it f Judy Myers Suchey, Ph.D. a FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST c; CONSULTANT TO THE MEDICAL EXAMMER/CORONER FOR THE COUNTIES OF LOS ANGELES.ORANGE.RIVERSIDE AND SAN BERNARDINO "-.. ►ROFUNN EXAMINATION OF HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS FROM CA-Ora=83: 9EPARTNENTOFANNNOPOLO9T UUFORNu STATE ONRrERSm Site visitation on October 12, 1993 RIIIENTON.CA 9204 rNONE 714-524-1295 �.. FAX 714-524-5150 << WER 714.295-MI On October 12, 1993 I visited the site of CA-Ora-83, located in the beach area near the intersection of Bolsa Chica and Warner. I spoke with Nancy Desautels, Archaeologist with SRS (Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc); David Kice, Human Osteologist working with SRS; and Phillip Ibanez, Native American Monitor. .. I examined the excavation pits and photographed burial 19 (BB9) which had been pedastelled and partially exposed. I photographed overall views of the excavation including the wet screening processing area. I examined briefly the skeletal material which had previously been excavated in the laboratory facility and spoke with both Nancy Desautels and David Kice regarding the analysis to date. The skeletal remains coming from this site are very old, approximately 8000 years old as indicated from some current dating procedures. The remains resemble the Early Horizon material from Central California regarding the heavy mineralization of the material . The bone comes from a uniform layer, the upper part of the Pleistocene terrace deposit. For this reason, the bone is clearly prehistoric and cannot be confused with modern skeletal material of forensic interest to the Coroner. The mineralization and the poor preservation ( usually the only bone remaining is long bone midshafts and cranial vault) make determination of prehistoric status a reliable procedure. Mr. Kice, currently working with SRS, has a good background in osteological procedures. His experience allows him to determine the nature of the bone and if any modern forensic material is ever found at the site there is no doubt that he will recognize it at once. I instructed both Nancy Desautels and David Kice to immediately inform the Coroner if such should occur. Further site visitation should not be necessary if the remains continue to be highly diagnostic and prehistoric. I spoke with Phillip Ibanez, Native American monitor and we discussed general outlines of the Coroner responsibility including why I take photographs to legally document my conclusions. Finally, I photographed and examined a cranial fragment in the laboratory which had an enigmatic feature which resembled, in part, trephination. At the end of the excavation (sometime during 1993 or early 1994) it was decided that David Kice and I would submit this material to Steve Dowell at the L. A. Coroner's office for examination of the defect with the dissecting microscope. The Native Americans are in agreement with the importance of examining this feature in order to properly interpret past events at the site. Judy Myers Suchey, Ph. D. Forensic Anthropologist Report written on October 16, 1993 Attachments: map of bone concentrations on CA-Ora-83 and resume of David Kice 1ENT BY:TOM PE4EA ;&3-94 2:19F`9 ; 277j* 71434o6907;4 1 i 04 1'i q ql A e.� M pAdu pit cj �d ctn .7A �} a ORA c�13 T 4 4 AYJ .04 Odcow, 440146P. uJ uC4,4 ` SRs ,moo z"4vu",U of /99c? .4 .a440pwav, 4WiAL n&"4A*W AW //2 3r;? Aw-v Mvwc i�t�ir��^ ��xt a•° � antrtirr-�:urtuncn ur.� i Mtn i SCENE - �• COUNTY OF ORANGE, CA� INVESTIGATOR'S CASE' NZIES "ONO. watlpaoor L illlnq: ❑ YES gq NO Ole, CLASSIFICATION ] Natural - A ❑ Homidde ❑ Aeddent ❑ OMcer ktvolved / Natural — NA ❑ Suk*W ❑ SIDS ❑ In Custody / ] Natural — Dual ❑ Traflfe ❑ Undeterrttlned ❑ Refer to PA ] Consult Dww. ❑Approached ❑Dodkted ❑Comea ❑Otfter eeedent'a Name ' IU: • ddress CIRCUMSTANCES 'ti /�1r��tl C f/ /�E$'�u7�L s / �/rD AA C Ht'OC GPI ekphons Ape 008 ex Race Ht oat Hair Eyes C •�E �i✓ 7'd AS c C ] Married ❑Divorced o Never Married ❑widowed ❑Children •lothinp 11G�r 4.1 )ccupation S.S. tr gate Of Death rune Day ho;pC vc= v^l c el/Ess.<'O G j /jo.tle> f- 9ece Of Death C o G 64r0 STo.vP S/nCr C� O/L/>t �oc s� � a..•�c,u��.c , t/./�, �o,�lc'� Fi�G.k.�S.�Tf . �`�'�'Y S T��c • Hospital: ❑IP ❑ERIOP ❑Dq* 'ronounced By e-C Z � N��` s d� r �J�.�6�,,,G�ls '� /1t1�P�fj � p� • :all R Fr dfG�. /IlsS�t rirtn taa 10d97 10-96 lace Received Mortuary //// ' /14 C� o AX 7'-0 sc t `/�[ T'�N .�c.tf�j -�►—�YN� jollu josted Called Trans. AMvad Relationship L L ,utopfy: O No O Coroner ❑ Private ❑toz O Cullum ❑SO-ID 'k(a-S 4D Cause of Death 49 .4 er-Qc.,rS T e, c o.vr,er r ,mud j' ,s'u c He j- per MD Lie No: Ave lye uGr l`//C�it C/ftL L �/ot/�C�/ G wesdGatDr Date �VO' 16rI �� /G !T1' �- I.D. work O SWW . Post Crim ® Sow* Poet r TO S !ram Number Of Pdaroid(s) Submiroed By h . G.S.R. a Location Taken At By - Physical Evidence Taken - By Other Evidence / I ( , � ✓ L'� •.s U Cl1�Cr� /�d' �I`� Disposition Blood d Tox. Taken Disposition Fingerprints Taken BY loll/( 3 p to e _ C aN•/`•f-C,-C'iJ Identified By NEXT OF KIN Sir�r e-65 Go T"© S t'?`C" �- /I. Lr,•."-t r' Name RewlonsMp Address '✓ �-,l �' G • Phone Name Relationship Address Photo Nodfied By Date Tune C o Billing Party =�-r >° Address ' WITNESS/INFORMANTS L -DL� ie �C�Gcic.��ccc Nart1e tiW,v cy C C S Phone 819• ' S 7 7 Ada�C�cr�rTrFr� R swnc� 5-/Lveyr iv 5r �P�2e�,!t. / J.9 •$� kk Name Photo PROPERTY O YES NO Dispositon: ❑ NOK O Mortuary a FSC Safe O other Relationship P.A'. Due Reported P.AAnvesdgewr P.A. Custody Of Property: ❑ Yes ❑ No REPORTS Dictated Signed F0e90-69.7 (RO4/92) J I SUM'VI CE CIO 1 W4 "A C-004AYJ? O �y SC 1 4 )v: IG,C Re SG.JACL: SU AtvaYS 1r N[' L`P J.JeJ� :V'C At! ICALOPORVin AS A ' MoNlroR 4-r A!v •9 ACV -4COLChe: ,c..fL S 1 rJ: DL rJLw^rC-0 m S aRA - 6 TNF FaLLaJa7Nc Cl n ANTS AA/0 L vPNr S OCCQARt:I? (t� 5R S n�1Aw•'tc�M�. Ju S�Ec,F �c� �Ly � � avtSr� � `fn . Iy REP, PotTS W4aAJ: N&T *ro Le dolt CVC-P4 t G wAi reO CA�f 0Ijwe, rH Pe4o74Fcr, (2) S'R s M 4N4Cc &IM.r,T .Swowis n Me A Cd AY OP A Q etr THAT IN fl1L4rJEb A STReNJ: Posrt74 rY oC 3WA L SaTC (5) 4r o44 93, 1S nePORT WAS `! Ae AW SLLr OC A TEr-&4JuIAv5 QEPJARJ1,tr0 7'o AC " SZl Sp"1C 1AMGFes.•• ('3) BCJA►J6 AMO r14ELJ_ 6eAp,S A4+Yp 04tv'"tirlvrt) OrM JL ARTJP.4cTS ADD p0Vf117LC JJe.r"AAl ACAw14JNS wEQC V8 ✓NO AT OILA • 63 , SR 5 "4A 44ENY J+v A JGA4T9 0 A %)A-r iNb qo ll i*o-,' OC 6dc 4�J:►co }� Rf O .Q. dat .2 b�� DAT VEtLOHE- LIVDEN"•FRALEX:111 Sworn to before me and subscrtl)ed in my presence , this ft i'7� deny of ,.�44- 19`�'�/ SEAL 4Q�� P ./ .-ri— - NOTARY PUBL O , 00 17V man - rulmmc op iti o Gar,04-4,i" t1y SCfG7"TIr-/L nl'Sot'act t)fi 14 U)VT0WjT9',O1 13 WA414 , C4 L, J:Pt A,;A A 4 A "Mo,v ,rod ` *-T VA R v-t coPJ - craJtfioN r � rfxS• ,A! .sOv7y eAAf LAL ,60�C,�Q , buximt, rkic nme 515- MR^RGE +-' ejur AeoUEsTeb r1JA%r .r .4tt,tr jiv Witir)Ntr A /= / �/�1 L QLrPORT •' RP(s44o 1-i I. A 2 '3 t yl=�4R PRdr�� r. t ti A rTgc "/ r ,rVC. T•o Cc7,,lGe ;34C r4OLLpJOJ4oG t+vC Anro C Virov7 S 6 Cc 1<D A A&V,9W ,0P DAILY oti'-f' ,�e RF Po�trs� AIAP •PL.Tr,.v4S' o1C r- iN ,s qNo Cb%(jtr v-r)oN S OF �11.L P9X-rIIV yUT YA %04Lc L 1nISuFflGri;Jv,' `ro ATF Jvci4 A A& PonT. tZ) P DSr i L.r r s-ro n t-o ..*-r Sti S or Ir 1.:17 l L A a W e 4 6 m 15 5 i-V 4 1H• PP0J°9'At-1 1.A-OCLL00 ) M13 tDCNTrP1fp r tMtA*/&Wt.V F 41tSEJCV,-o ANo 4M440•WrLY Pf*rw4- 14L i=na)s1 0. &if2 PRc TeerS, (3 ) f1 FT�11 c� NYi.: -T.43 tvn/ .� ,�ru C 0A,: Y tF' CA-Av •� `PAifiaw» rho11EMW .�_ Sworn toe a me and subscribed in my presence this day of 19 l�e SEAL a�oyN $ •;r'�� '-� NOTARY PUBLIC sl�Tf OF . k • aY'y 15 , 1994 - hom. It May concern: , ag the summer of 1992, in July, I received the enclosed ( eas of photographs of human remains and burial associated facts found at Ora-83 frcurDavid Belardes. He never �tcated to me whether these remains were reported to the Orange ty Coroner, the Native American Heritage Commission or any of '.wmost likely descendants" . As one of the "most likely pendants" of the aabrielano/Tongva tribe, I have never britned of the disposition of those human remains or any other ins that have been encountered at the Bolsa Chica sites. � bit time Mr. Belardes also indicated to no that there were rous other sacred things that had been found including human. ;'. .ins with incisions on them and human teeth with holes drilled - , them. I indicated to him the sacred nature of this site and . ad him about his presence on this site, which could endanger :'�:psople and his. His statements revalidated what I have known I-aldng, that Bolsa Chica has been a cemetary site of my ' (@store and a site in which the old ceremonies were performed. ! L si-te should never be disturbed! ad 14 }r. i J;.. his::P{ q 00, is :► .:X J �.��M•.n r;,'�• cogg t Cogged Stone Charmstone. Whistle, Femur fragment (75-80cm) 4 Is 400 Shell Feature f" • t. / r Femur, Pelvis, 4 Femur, Phalanx • IS N!, Femur fragment (I 08cm) !V i Skull �, �1 ?•{4 r : : • 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed this 7th day of February 1994 at Huntington Beach, California. On Oct. 8, 1992 1 had a 26 minute conversation with David Belardes, Indian monitor of ORA83 and leader of the Juaneno band. The entire conversation was about ORA83 and the discovery of very old human remains. David said he had observed 8 human bone burials at the north bank of eucalyptus trees and one human bone burial at the south bank of eucalyptus trees. He said the graves had many religious objects like crystals and charmstones. He said there were necklaces and many other objects. He felt that it was much too sacred to touch. In fact he was scared to touch any of it and said he would not touch them. He'�it was a very religious site and they were still digging. We discussed the fact that 6 burials meant that this site was eligible to be an Indian Cemetery district. He also stated that S.R.S. had already reported 2 other finds of human bones and that the remains of 11 others were at UCLA and that he would like to get his hands on those so he could re-bury them. He said Koll was allowing him to re-bury the remains on the Huntington Beach Mesa which is owned by the Koll company. David was very excited about working for Koll as Koll was going to help pay legal fees for tribal recognition on the Federal level. Koll was going to pay for or provide: I. Pre history of the Juaneno people. 2. Going to allow re-burial on Koll property at permanently undisturbed site. 3. Provide the ethno history of the area and the Juaneno people. 4. Provide jobs for "my people" (He and his son Mingo were already employed). At the close of the conversation he discussed his cousin Raymond Belardes who was the former monitor for S.R.S. He indicated Raymond had not been honest and had taken and worn artifacts from ORA83. He also said Raymond had monitored 14 additional burial sites. David was very excited about these bone burials and the information they would provide about Juaneno history. B1ISINF5S UFf lt'4 _ PO—BX 4007, WHITTIER; CA 90607-4007 it• J. ---- NOV 01, 1992 SEE RE :ONS own BbJ AMOUNT OF PREVIOUS BILL 5.2E 10/ 7 PAYMENT RECEIVED - THANK YOU BALANCE AND/OR' ADJUSTMENTS .3 MONTHLY SERVICE 10/28 - 11/27 ZONE UNIT CALLS U141T MIN ;YPE 724P 9/29 IRVINE CA 714 786-4939 119 41 il=_ 1 1029A 10/ 1 ORANGE CA 714 998-1900 i0 428P 10/ 1 ORANGE CA 714 633-3139 10 DD 818P 10/ 2 ORANGE CA 714 633-3139 71 24 DE 451P 10/ 4 ORANGE CA 714 998-2454 23 13 .2z 1150A-10 6 ORANGE —-CH 714 937-L040-- J=- 1020A 10/ 7 ORANGE CA 714 937-2040 14 2 '= 243P 10/ 7 ORANGE CA 714 998-1900 14 2 = 1007A 10/ 8 LAKEWOOD CA 310 593-0286 26 5 DD 2-: 325P 10/ 8 ORANGE CA 714 978-5650 31J 6 J 730A 10/ 9 LAKEWOOD CA 310 593-0286 7 D:: 1132A 10/ 9 LAKEWOOD CA 310 593-0286 13 3 - 301P 10/11 ORANGE CA 714 633-3i39 2 � : 1058A 10/12 ORANGE CA 714 633-3139 734P 10/12 LONG BEACH CA 310 427-8443 7 i 735P 10/12 LONG BEACH CA 310 427-g44.7 - - - "- 731A 10/14 ORAt:GE CA 714 998-1900 139P 10/14 LAKE!-,COD C- 310 59T-32C6 2-- _ 941A 10/15 LAKEWOOD C; 310 553- .286 22 217P 10/15 ORANGE CA 714 978-565C 1014A 10/22 ORANGE CA 714 937-2000 851A 10/26 ORANGE CA 714 9.78-5650 TCTAL ZONE UNIT CHARGES .E LONG DISTANCE - GTE FROM MIti TYPE 1022A 9/29 SADLBCKVLY CA 714 581-4504 Al .2� 805P 9/29 CAPITRNVLY CA 714 493-8944 `' 1046A 10/ 1 COLTON CA 714 783-4687 1 DID 1047A 10/ 1 CORONA CA 714 734-6873 25 651P 10/ 6 CORONA CA 714 734-6873 17 LE 2.;;2 846A 10/ 8 CORONA CA 714 734-6873 T Dr 508P 10/ 8 PLACE14TIA CA 714 993-9613 ' 828P ll0/ 8 CAPITRNVLY CA 714 493-4933 26 DE 2.y"' 1026A 10/14 W ANGELES CA 310 206-8934 20 DD 4.4-5 258P 10/14 CAPITRNVLY CA 714 493-8944 2 D:) _ 356P 10/15 CORONA CA 714 734-6873 17, DD 908P 10/15 CHINO CA 714 623-1193 - —707P_10/16-CORONA _CA_7114..734-6873______ 709P 10/21 LA HAIiRA C1 310 691-plj-*35 _ 445P 10/22 YORBALINDA CA 714 779-2896 546P 10/23 CHINO CA 714 591-5611 " - 1039A 10/24 UPLAND CA 714 931-1973 928A 10/25 CORONA CA 714 734-05872; DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE USAGE - 2 CALLS 0 BILLABLE CALLS SvB,T31r.L ��. V �� -"---�-mod...- - •o i ----��,-y�o�7fa.-- ------- --- - -... __.. r • • 11 ,� 4q ! (Background: I had been very concerned about rumors I'd been hearing for about one year regarding burials, artifacts and unethical conduct by the hired archaeologist and helpers at Ora-83. It felt wrong forme not to pursue getting to the bottom of it to clear it up for myself. In June, 1993, 1 actively began to pursue how to find information and was subsequently led to David Belardes. Notes made while in conversation with David Belardes regarding I'd been CA ORA-83 archaeological site on the Bolsa Chica Mesa. August 12. 1993, about 8nm - 8:30om I began by telling David where I was coming from. These are the notes I took on what David said: "This whole thing" has been going on 15-20 years. Ray Belardes, a Gabriellno, had been out there for two years. David had taken over when Ray left. "I have yet to sign contracts with them." He called them the Noll Company. It was a known burial site. When the "burials come up" we re- pury them. My son is doing the ceremonials at the re-burials. "I'm taking care of my ancestors. I'm getting the bones re-buried.` We're not letting the public know because we don't want people out there. The bones are being analyzed at UCLA to see how many bodies, as there are fragments. If there are 5 burials found it is a cemetery. We must get the archaeology documentation recorded. Harrington's Notes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs will give you some history. There are many artifacts that are important. Puvungna is a sacred site at CSULB. A community garden was dug up. C*ULB says it is not a sacred site. "Handled it badly." I asked, "How can the public get to know all these things? The public should know." if a good investigative reporter did a good job 1 La_-4ir�;Ji C6: �..» t> ` Zr lc - 1 � t . "A lot of heads are going to roll--archaeologists and county people. There are buy offs, the necessary historical recording is not getting done." Some of the tribes think I'm being bought off by Noll Co., but I am taking care of my ancestors, getting bones re-buried, some site delineated for them. I have yet to sign contracts with them. On September 10. 1993. 1 had a second phone conversation with David Belardes. The Bull dozers had begun to roll on Bolsa Chica Mesa to demolish the bunkers and I was super concerned. I wanted to know if he knew this was going on. I reached him between 4:30 -5 pm and we talked for about 1/2 hour: Raymond Belardes was a cousin, a Native American Monitor and Gabrielino. He talked about Sparky, and Cindy Alvitre, former chair of the Gabrielino people. There were four factions and leaders and they didn't always agree. He said Cindy Alvitre was mad at him. Thought he'd sold out. But he stands with them on issues. He went to Malibu to stand with Rochas and Cindy, to testify. Puvungna was State Prooertu. There was an injunction to stop work there. But Bolsa Chica is Qrivatg property. Can't be handled same way. At site Ora 83 only a portion of site is left. It's graded up against the bunker. There are artifacts and possible human remains. We are monitoring graders as they pull back from the bunker. Yes. he knew what was going on. "I was out there Wed. pm. My son is out there all the time." Next week the work will start. There was a pre-grade meeting that not many people knew about. The archaeologist wasn't there. Nancy Desautels got involved later. One portion of the site is left. There are four burials there. Five bunals and it's a probable legal cemetary. I asked what he thought of the possibility that a fifth burial would be found. He thought there was a good chance I k;--d ild it It' . He '►" . :�+':t _ r :�I�r ,,f r��l':rlth5 H �U a - e *,t181 1-nove,'.edge:i JJ I-f I l eu'el He talked about re-burial agreements. Under an old agreement, the bodies were removed from the site completely. Under a newly negotiated agreement the bodies were being re-buried on the Bolse Chica Mesa in an open space to the west and they would have access to them. He said he'd worked with the developer the last two years to work out this agreement. He said, "I have not signed a confidentiality clause." i told David we had to have a meeting with people in the Land Trust. The grading was too disturbing, that we had to see what we could do to save these sacred sites. David had some time on Sunday, and a meeting was set for 1 pm in Laguna Beach. Sunday, September 12,1993 David Belardes arnved with a Joyce Perry, which was a surprise, as he hadn't mentioned he would be bringing anyone. Our Land Trust group included Chris and Ron Hegge, at whose home we met, Paul and Flossie Horgan, Connie Boardman, Dick LeGrue, and Juana Mueller. Over lunch we introduced ourselves and said where we were coming from. After David introduced himself, he continued to talk. Personally, I soon realized that David could not help save the land, and that must have affected my retention of what he said, and I didn't take any notes. I remember only one thing vividly. It was an interchange between David and Joyce and a difference of opinion on whether something should be told. David decided to tell it. He related an incident with a sacred charm stone and how awed the participants in the incident were in the presence of the stone. It had mysteriously moved off the table where it had been placed. The other members of the meeting remember other things that were said. That was the last time I talked to David Belardes. Respectfully submitted, i,• Sept 12, 1993: Sunday (I think) Meeting with Belardes We told him of our concerns about the bodies being taken out of BCMEsa. He said that there had been at least 4 or 5 remains found and that 4 of them were female and that there would be more found. That it was ORA83 and that he was not concerned. Sept 12 1993 David said he was the only one brave enough to deal with this site. Apparently there is a feeling that Raymond had used a charm stone found at the site and he wasn't suppose to and so some bad energy was about. He related that some artifact had rolled off a table by itself and that had importance to him. Also this was a very old site ORA83, and that beads made from bone or teeth had been found and that relqious cannabalism or something like ceremonial canablism acts took place. It seemed someone made a comment that it was not different from what is done with the wine and bread at Mass now. Anyway, the significance was that this was an ancient sit. In fact, I think he said the ancient ones lived' there. He said that his concern was that his ancestors be reburied and that he only cared about that. THe mention was made that he was negotiating a new contract with Koll now. He did not tell us anything about the specifics. He did mention that he felt that they were going to make a park on the Mesa. ( I believe that is why we now have the 16 acre Rib and R3a on page 3-14 or EIR) He clearly was not interested in saving the place. He may have felt it was the best he could hope for. Joyce Perry(I think that was her name) also came with David. y_ i February 13, 1994 - � I Honorable Members of the Huntington Beach City Council: was asked to review several documents and provide comments for your consideration on the archaeological site CA-ORA-83 (The Cogstone Site). ... .._ Having conducted past professional archaeological investigations on the site for the property owner, I have some familiarity with the site. Currently working as a professional archaeologist for the federal government, I am no longer engaged in private contract archaeology and now reside out-of-state. Based on my review of the Dr. Suchey Report of October 16, 1993 discussing Human Bu:ial XIX and the SRS Map of Bone Concentrations of ` August 25, 1993, it is logical to assume that these roman numeral marking these particular bone concentrations are actually referring to human burials. It also appears that there are twenty-five human burials. The importance of this site, and only this site,-to answer numerous scientific research questions due to its age and unique artifacts must be emphasized and indeed, this site is of national distinction. Sincerely, Marie Cottrell, Ph.D. 13 i (' true copy of ..orEglnal rec DU _ _ , �1U'► C A `':�; CtS, SHERIFF UqR' Ora 83 cOFJ .. - -- Fl-- ; 253 .41.......: 2ss 25 S YI X p47 D12� XX. D3L OJO -D29 �- p1H �� D39 'i X d X•< 7C X ?t \� �F- i Gov 30SJOS x X Y X `X. _. ,t r- :� 3309 we X 022. DIO Ds X Da t C N Q °� x.x � ..`�O �h O �` x z >tJiO D50 X x VI X x Y I.V I zCi E/ 90� n eoE/ � s53 05 S ..-;: X ..>:..' `C!C-. 7C X?( - :%1 :. :o->;:.: s 353 .051 DJ6 02 .. .. yF ©e� : At Y � Yx Y `C 90FJ BBZ Z/ 1 2 2 ZS .26 EJ .00 40S / 40S :.>. •:..y...., .:;`':i`' .L.:•. L .x. L2 X X LJ. La X N - .X lB l9 10 I1 ct .l, X VYX ® Yx Y z X Y X x x Y 1 XJ \ NI X 1 N]\ Y NL. SX 2 WE/ J'; XX X::: Y .::.::..c .:rc•: Ss :,.::.•..::::: ..•. . x s X2 N5 ..X N6 N7 NH > Pa - CG/<;.;3::; 1308 c. c 809 N BB1:o-::i;i; X5' X6 X7 M r R0.`.. ...::.:•.::hi.; vv . -fc�; E, ff 1 2 .DD3..: -.Cb :.: UUS. tU6 7 B 009 O XX 1 X �,» EEI E2 > c > ....-.:.:. :'6:: :.:>:- us '� us s"s°�' XY Known Bone Concentrations SO -- -- ---- ----- -- - (Depth Range:55-100 on hom suAao9) G 1 2 �F3 If4 iFs. F6 Units completed ,. / Rock Features Cogged Stones i 60F1 75E eo O Charmstones cos cos _ 6sE/ 70E/ �—--— -— — — cos N (;Os Tree trunks os 2,. A Trash,debris,brush • r•y;:;rz%'t-w:a Tree line x Isolated bone fragments ( / ® Shell Features Map Updated 8/25/93 ll�� Judy Myers Suchey, Ph.D. FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST CONSULTANT TO YHE MEDICAL EXAMINER/CORONER ��_`�• �. FOR THE COUNTIES OF LOS ANGELES•ORANGE.RIVERSIDE AND SAN BERNARDJNO'-:may. 4 0 tanFEttoll EXAMINATION OF HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS FROM CA-Ora}:�� OEPARTMENTOFANTNROPOl06Y Site visitation on October 12, 1993 � Or CAUFONINA 9111E UNIVERSITY L� O1 FUU.E>ITON.CA 1125a4 G��r3,. MWE 714624-IN5 FAX 7145245150 NEETEO IM2054501 On October 12, 1993 I visited the site of CA-Ora-83, located in the beach arse near the intersection of Bolsa Chica and Warner. I spoke with Nancy Desautels Archaeologist with SRS (Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc) ; David Kice, Human_'` Osteologist working with SRS; and Phillip Ibanez, Native American Monitor. I examined the excavation pits and photographed burial 19 (BB9) which had been pedastelled and partially exposed. I photographed overall views of the excavation. '= including the wet screening processing area. I examined briefly the skeletal,•-.. material which had previously been excavated in the laboratory facility and spok '. with both Nancy Desautels and David Kice regarding the analysis to date.;. }' The skeletal remains coming from this site are very old, approximately •8000`yee old as indicated from some current dating procedures. The remains resemble the . Early Horizon material from Central California regarding the heavy mineral i z 'tiW of the material . The bone comes from a uniform 1ayer, the upper part of the Pleistocene terrace deposit. For this reason, the bone is clearly prehistoric and cannot be confused with modern skeletal material of forensic interest to Coroner. The mineralization and the poor preservation ( usually the only bone., remaining is long bone midshafts and cranial vault) make determination of pre status a reliable procedure. Mr. Kice, currently working with SRS, has a good:• background in osteological procedures. His experience allows him to determine:, the nature of the bone and if any modern forensic material is ever found at the.: N site there is no doubt that he will recognize it at once. I instructed boW.. Nancy Desautels and David Kice to immediately inform the Coroner if such should occur. Further site visitation should not be necessary if the remains continue: to be highly diagnostic and prehistoric. ` I spoke with Phillip Ibanez, Native American monitor and we discussed general-' outlines of the Coroner responsibility including why I takephotographs to lea l document P Y 9 Y 9 Y: . my conclusions. ••� • •••� Finally, I photographed and examined a cranial fragment laboratory 9 gment in the laborato which,* had an enigmatic feature which resembled, in part, trephination. At the end of. the excavation (sometime during 1993 or early 1994) it was decided that David Kice and I would submit this material to Steve Dowell at the L. A. Coroner's ,offico. for examination of the defect with the dissecting microscope. The Native Americang; are in agreement with the importance of examining this feature in order to properjy;. interpret past events at the site. Judy Myers Suchey, Ph. D. r Forensic Anthropologist Report written on October 16, 1993 Attachments: map of bone concentrations on CA-Ora-83 and resume of David Kice _SK . Pj ` ✓ -s�-1W4 1 05 24 ; FROM ItosiME l hJTL TO •�. . co�tsst.l Lucy Dint, (714)3T4-U77 FACT SH6.ET �I Arched 00 Cd Exenvattoas at Bolla t ci • + Box ip har ' t ( � o eoto�ica excaTatioas been 101M on at'Bdu Chka ?. :, :i .. . I "Cheoloiy sites on BgLu Chiea Mass have been subject to study and . i fi : exCdva�ton linos the 1970s. Tea most recant excavations, which arc the subject pf 'e • =,Won wereiniti in thesummer of I M. The excavations one of the sites ORA-83) by Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc 9 cadet:the ' di WdOn of Dr. Nancy A. Whitney-Desautels. All of the work done by SRS, I been rzviewed byan expert team of peer reviewers, comprised of throe of the.stveli •' most distinguvshod archwlo sts. .; I � W bone f e disc v at this site? When Mere the ? i Qs env bwaaa bo ragmen o �t�ed is dik , A• Yes. uman boas fagme nu a boast discovered at this dto by the arch ' t; '+ COW as eerily u fall I At the time of their discovery howwet, the — not In the context of relatled human bone ,s j isoo�vesed f:yg anu. Mor �uncovered both.hutasti and animal bona WVer, the ; • lAtgme is and at the time of cfovay did not have sufficient Information to detarmift .; .; whu w .t what. *The boas ha�tnessis were sent to UCLA for further a oq to , .? which fragi r►ts human and which were animal. Results of the al"m not made availabi until 1993. VV1W colon did Pr. Dowavte Udw upon receiving results of the UCLA atpdW?; A: Ones Dz. Deaavtels had confil"on that the bone fragments she discovered were human,'she notified the Corot q's office as required by state law. Judy Suchey atas j and her rt to the Coro was hired by the coroner's office tO investigate the repast, repo : ,, the doctinmt discussed in the pews articles. Neither Dr. Desautels not Koll Estrin Group was aware of July Suchey's report or were provided with s copy Qf the , Mport untz'1 it was given to the mparay by tuwspaper - . OY 3 2i13L�r-. ' ... ... ..• ♦• •• • •. ,. . rii'•,. .. •. .I �•t .. .._. . . .. ._.I...I. • ....M•. .• ♦•N'.••r. .C•..ib.. • r•.1.Y•..1f/'•r�.A• r.. .5,.. •f'.• .it i :J�.:y::I•. '. ILD a f Fro-� �. g -ro - s s e a & err .n r EVO .•.r •w ._ • • • _r•._ •ate♦��.—�_�•r�• � •r ,_ r.Lr•_�_�.�'_ •. .r•_•w• .A_. �r _.a• .� • r .. �N•M•.w •_ ' wr �•�w�•�r r" •�� S•� :=1... ?' _i:�_.. ��+ r-� it Al Y.-...UlW .. 300'• 5:•,` � ate. .� •a_ .... ••�....G .:��l - ,�L..wi�.aa ��.�• .rt..�:�r�sld.:�::...�.►:-...:3...�-w..•._:.L��... �:w'..�A.i�i.�:.wt _ .c-"�'r�af�i1"♦ J .. .. _._ a._.tZ.:. .. _ ._:2V- �a.r'..i'.�....i .. .. - - �-•''_ - _�.____..—_y_—.—_._..._...._. y.,•.,.-�YMt_wir�iw.�+s♦+� 01/31/94 11-.47 $310 431#221 BAKER & BURTON jU 002 Hav C1 h o 1 € LAW 40r ICES C �rc v_ tf 1460 o� BAKER ANr> BURTON Za 75 Irc4tal-,ej A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION to Mr K oo, of n• 'A is L'15 LONG} 13CACI'1 SOULEVARO f.UITC SO& CJ :C"T SVRTON LONG BEACH. CALIFORNIA 00802 mcw.+OSA *EACH OFFICE j 41lAO N. SAKER (110) 4QS-9S53 6#5 PIER ^vGNIdc t /PAWL MOROAN MCRMOSA SEACH. CALIFORNIA 9006A. FAX (3101 430-32ZI 17101 770-SS97 FAX 17101 370-7403 CERTIFIED MAIL — RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Cp C_�s•� It rf Zj...p (.�" January 19, 1994 1 Mr. James Beisner Chief Deputy Coroner - �- . • Orange County Coroner's Office `� ' -2 S er—C^� 1071 W. Santa Ana Boulevard P eose no'u'.., *Or, Li�H•er It, Santa Ana, CA 92701picu5e :it atoo. 5( Dear Mr. Beisner: < YeA Te5 0� I{^a recorc�r r., { e d . This letter is a request, pursuant to Governor 6250 at ssa. , that the orange County Coroner's office forward to ti� S so, at the Long Beach office listed above, the following records in the possession of the Coroner's office: ' All records of human remains found on the '3olsa Chica mesa in Orange County, California, received by the Orange County Coroner's office between January 1, 1990 and the present. This request includes, but is not limited to, all records of human remains found on the archeological site known as CA-ORA 83. Pursuant to Government Code Section 6257, I am including with this request a chock in the amount of $25.00 in favor of the Coroner's office to pay for copying charges. If the amount is insufficient, please notify me and I will pay all reasonable additional copying charges. Thank you. Vs truly yours, G _t PAUL H RGAN PH/PC enclosure 1 l � ' p Vfiat angered project oponents. L . Bos Augele$ c�imea ;ARTIFACTS = was that no mention of the 1992 find had been made in the c:ounty's Continnea:irom Bi i draft environmental impact report y on the project released late last!'-, The rub is-that the place is r 41 year. "It's a significant omission."',._ smack ip fife middle of a contro- �.versial for amultimillion- j said Flossie Horgan. president of• i Areheolo cal (dollar developmentil that would put the opposes t e de Land Trust,which 4,286 new homes near the wet- opposes the development on envl- { lands. Thus the recent discovery. concern s e is grounds "Our major q while delighting archeologists,has c credibility." Find Unearths put the project at the center of a According to those involved in furious debate that has some City the process, the omission resulted Council members calling for a ply from bureaucratic de gr-.nd jury investigation. ays / Furious Debate At issue: Did the Koll Real Koll company o say that they reported tl��ence of the � • Estate Group. which owns the bones to the coroner's office—as property, properly handle and re- required by law—in June. 1992. . port the discovery of the bones.or shortly after determining chat the ■ Artifacts:Handling of bones - did it try to cover up the find to emains were human at dig entwines site's developer, safeguard building plans? The ar- A spokesman for the coroner's gument has drawn environmental- office could not confirm that date, Native Americans, politicians, ;lets and politicians already opposed ` but said that he was unaware of environmentalists and ,to the project. archeologists with ; any attempt by the company to t academic interests, state bureau skirt Now district crate with laws to uphold and aced the law. 'They have cooper- } dep- various factions of Native Ameri- ` sty fully, Jim Selmer,chief coroner.said of the Koll com- ► ut attorney is asked to investigate. cans. On Saturday morning, about 60 parry's efforts. . By DAVID'iiALDANE angry Native Americans staged a And Tom Mathews, director of planning for the county s Environ- TIMES STAFF WRITER protest on the steps of Huntington mental Management Agency Beach City Hall. which oversaw preparation of the ' HUNTINGTON BEACH—The place "We will not be manipulated and looks like little more than an abandoned .. environmental impact report,said intimidated. said Jim Velaaques, � the �� archeological finds or work site now. chief of the coastal Gabrieleno Bolas Chica were not mentioned in c - On a windy winter day,the heavy smell ;Shoshone tribe and one of the of damp earth rises from the ground. And ; the document because studies to.: amid an array of metal storage trailers, the c protests organizers. 'No more se- determine their.scientific Crecy in a closed room:we want toff-' landscape is dotted with piles of loosenedthere." • cattce had not yet been completed. know what's going on out "I'm not going to put a letter Adirt. lthough officials say that the ; from Judy Suchey to the coronet* It wasn't always that way.Once.arche- controversy is unlikely to derail i the environmental impact ' ologists believe,this 7.4-acre site near the* the project entirely, it already has . port, Mathews said. "I'hata Bolas Chica wetlands was a large village resulted in calls within the Hun- ; report;it's her opinion.and I wart teeming with the life and culture of an tington Beach City Council fora to see how this information is ancient civilization.There,men and wom- court injunction against the devel- x en. they say, spent significant portions of oper as well as the grand jury ; interpreted by the scientific com- their lives doing the things that people ' Muntty.' have always done to survive. s investigation. A recent hearing on A report on the bones being Y the proposed development drew ; In recent ears, in fact, the site has 600 residents, repared b Nancy Whitney-De- In y : sautels.astate-certified archea10- become what many describe as one of the Lucy Dunn,senior vice president g�hired by the Koll company,is richest archeological digs in the state, of the Koll Group, said, "We've to released well in yielding an abundance of important Native abided by the law and followed all expected American artifacts Amon them are hun- procedures." advance of the county Board of dreds of " stones"-- ear-like objects, The controversy began last Supervisors vote on the environ- mental impact report next fall. the purpose of which remains a mystery. `.month when opponents of the prof- ; Mathews said If she concludes that And two years ago, scientists unearthed :ect leaked to the press an internal the Bolas Chica bones are sekntifi- several human-bone fragments purported ; memo written by a forensic an- to be about 8,000 years old, including a thropologist hired by the Orange portion of a skull bearing a human-bored County-coroner's office to examine hole. : the bones found at the site in 1992. "It's a very important site,"said Patricia ' In the memo, Judy Myers Suchey a faculty member at Cal State �, I Martz, a professor of anthropology at Cal ale V State L,os Angeles,and chairwoman of the Fullerton, described the bones as state Historical Resources Commission very old, approximately 8,000 "It's one of the very few we have from that years; and therefore of serious I]� time period." interest to archeologists. J Please see ARTIFACTS,Be Dunn acknowledged Saturday that a number of otner oowes were . _ found earlier at the site. but said s'-ie couldn't comment on their scientific importance. t .t jury investigation into the compa- few bearing,signs,such as ny's handling of the archeological Developmentty aespfGVtNai finds Amencan8"—listenedlW epee( To me this is really significant" denouncing thpr =92sod pro ROBERT LACHMAN / Lae Angel-Ttrnes said Councilman David Sullivan, "The gr�j}}lgg got to Stop," Cog stone" was found at site of who seconded the motion "Is the �� Alvitre a Gahrieleno proposed housing development Koll company following the law7 director of -�1VatJv_9`Amen How much did they know about maritime cultural society in L the significance of this site when Beach "Who gave tbethq n (ally significant Mathews said, they lust went on doing their to rape my Alcestors'►_We• that information will be included in excavations" demanding an.Investigation of the final impact report to be used The motion was eventually ta- cranes as a basis for future decisions on Posed y.Lea *thee bled while the city's staff prepares the Koll compagK,Leavebthe L issuing construction permits a report on its legal ramifications alone"' - . � "Itcould significantly modify the The matter is expected to be dead- Archeolog1sta0,Vaea nw) le;� project,"Mathews said,adding that ed in about two weeks they are eager to begiuQeaim the developers conceivably could In the meantime,a new group of the lessons that the b, be forced to build around the protesters has entered the fray to teach, archeological site, which const.i- Native Americans who say they Among thoselesso` #I hit tutes only a small portion of the have been kept in the dark regard- these earl Calif 400-acre construction Y eat'wl proposed ing the discovery and disposition of was their saw, horlond , zone the bones of their ancestors they hve, what sort'jW me ii Such assurances, however, did The company has employed sev- problems did they haavv w( little to mollify critics some of era] Native American monitors they rich or poor? ' whom have said they believe that since the projects beginnings "This could fill a gap,jn c the Koll company may have en- Recommended by various arcbeol- knowledge," said Constance Cai gaged in a cover-up At a recent ogists involved in the project, the eron, curator of_the Museum city hearing attended by 6W resi- three monitors, each representing Anthropology 4 Cal StaWFulle dents in fact those suspicions a specifi- tribal group have been ton "When you haven't had t found voice in a motion by City on hand during all of the excava- remains to stu Councilman Ralph Bauer, who re- lions at the site and subsequent much" q' you s�'`t,knc quested a temporary restraining discussions regarding the findings With development inching clo order against further disturbance Recently however, another er however, the,,Sign i of the site and calling for a grand group—identified by the slate's short 3 Y '►r }'At� Native American Heritage Com- "Once this site is golie;`&he ear mission as the most likely descend- "it's gone. It's-a nazi- ewab ants of the individuals whose re- resource'• r; � mains were discovered at Bolsa --- Chica—have challenged the right of the Koll-employed monitors to act on their behalf "They don't speak for us"Velasques said I So instead of accepting a recent invitation by the Koll company to meet for a discussion on the dispo- sition of their ancestors' remains, the group staged a protest Satur- day morning The protesters—a • s A ` Fo AV At i � • i Sig / l • fir' ' � � � � I i s i i ` • /, r f 1/ jr WiprSWFAS 1; /ON I` Arm- IF Ap / o i 9A ,n irrLG lcy2 AZt" , 4T� ` DECLARATION OF PAT WARE I, Pat Ware, declare as follows . 1 . I am the president of the Pacific Coast Archeological Society, Inc. I make this declaration concerning the current removal of bunkers being conducted by the Koll Company and Signal Landmark at the Bolsa Chica in Orange County, California under permit no. 5-90-1143 . I am especially concerned about the effects of the demolition project on that certain archeological site known as ORA 83 (Orange County site 83 ) . 2 . ORA 83 is especially significant as an archeological site because over 300 "cogst::nes" (small artifacts with crooves ` or notches on the perimeter _esembling czar w:eels ) have., found there. Although some believe these artifacts to have ceremonial significance, no one really ;snows what the items represent. We do know, however, that they may have been fashioned as early as 5,000 B. C. We also know that the Bolsa Chica site ORA 83 (hereafter "the cogstone site") has yielded more cogstones than the sum total of those found anywhere else in the world. 3. Both the Gabrielino and Juaneno bands of Indians consider the cogstone site to have special significance to the: . a w a _�; c- i rt,�^-�, r.� .:.� �-hP �i�-zk s ;� the ��—�vzoQ ve:ar�� alasR+d -as G1.4h.-b-irt A. 5 . I have, since approx-fmately 1972 , been concerned about t..e s,5._`�cG c� ,::,, ir_terest t .7 � in the site, I succeeded, with the help of certain professional archeologists in having the site nominated for the National Register of Historic Places in 1983. Minote�s s€ the ing du i 6 . I have long been aware of the landowner's intention to possibly develop the Bolsa Chica mesa. In this regard, I was supposed to be involved in an independent review committee which was designated under another Coastal Committee permit (5-89-772) concerning work on the mesa and the proper archeological research and handling of the cogstone site. However, the independent review was removed from permit no. 5-89-772 at the request of Signal Landmark in about 1991 . This was done without my consent. 7 . The writing attached as Exhibit C is from a letter written by the landowner's attorney relative to the independent review committee and project 5-89-772. The statements set forth in Exhibit C are inaccurate and misleading as the cogstone site has at all times since 1983 been eligible for listing on the. National Register. In this regard, I am informed that the landowner blocked federal listing on the National Register by not giving consent to such listing. The site is still deemed eligible, however. 8. On or about September 9 , 1993 , I learned that the demolition of the bunker site was proceeding. At that time, I reviewed certain rapers of the Ca,i`orn-f a Coastal Co=4 ssion -2- concerning the demolition project. One of these documents, attached hereto as Exhibit D, is a report from the landowner's archeologist which was submitted to the Coastal Commission in support of the application for the bunker demolition and which states that the relatively intact deposits on the site are located 1000 feet from the large bunker. This statement is misleading, as no one can say, without actual hand excavation, that important archeological information does not remain throughout the site. This is in part because of the significance of the site. 9 the-ZQastal that the-jroj_Pct g hei-n eendeebed a. oat 1 et ^DA 83 . 10. Since learning of the demolition, I have personally inspected the demolition site. At this time, I saw that the grading activities associated with the demolition have been conducted on ORA 83 . Approximately 150 feet to 200 within the boundary of ORA 83 have been graded. I believe this grading activity has significantly damaged the site. 11 a Iarghe 1 cati ac a as Exhibit F. ^. e.. arged is a tac .ea as �een on the ma _ -0 be no more t an om th _ Of - ave :._ . _ _ mho area 16 e boundary of the eligible Natinnal Hictnri "ist., a ac wo p o os as Exhi i on this- exhibit war, taleen __ is a 13artiorl of ORA 53 which .as been grace gracea. The nottom phet-o-looks bask . I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, and that<• this declaration was executed this 19th day of September, 1993 at Huntington Beach, California. P�7 J- /Ja A g.'. PAT WA IRE HM CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Connie Brockway, City Clerk li SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica Letter from Supervisor Harriett M.Wieder Dated February 9, 1994 DATE: February 10, 1994 Attached is a letter received today from Supervisor Harriett Wieder regarding the Bolsa Chica EIR public hearing process. The copies sent to me from the Supervisor's Office to distribute to you were all accidentally addressed to Councilmember Sullivan and that is why you do not each have an individual letter. CB:jh Enclosure cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development Gail Hutton, City Attorney BOLSAEIR bcc: Mike Adalis FOE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Connie Brockway, City Clerk Cie) SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica Letter from Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder to the Orange County Planning Commission dated February 9, 1994 DATE: February 14, 1994 Attached is another letter received today from Supervisor Harriett Wieder regarding the Bolsa Chica EIR public hearing process. CB:jh Enclosure cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development Gail Hutton, City Attorney • I HARRIETT M . WIEDER . .~iSUPERVISOR. SECOND DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION 10 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA.P.O. OOX 687. SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA 92702-0687 M�"�•f PHONC (714) 834-3220 FAX (714) 834-6109 February 9, 1994 Mr. E. Chuck McBurney Chairman Orange County Planning Commission 300 N. Flower 3rd Floor, Room 315 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 Dear Mr. Mc neye,_/�_ At the request of the Huntington Beach City Council and in an effort to ensure maximum public participation in the public hearing process for the Bolsa Chico project, I am writing to request that the Orange County Planning Commission hold one of its hearings on the Bolsa Chico Project in the City of Huntington Beach. I believe that a hearing in Huntington Beach is in the best interest of the community and the public hearing process. In this manner, we can ensure that the Planning Commission has the benefit of testimony from citizens and special interest groups that have been so devoted to the Bolsa Chico. While not common, it is my understanding that this action Is not precedent-setting and public hearings have on occasion been held in other locations. Given the extraordinary public interest in this project and my efforts to reach agreement on the vital issue of restoration of the Bolsa Chico, I appreciate your favorable consideration of my request. Sincerely, HARRIETT M.WIEDER Supervisor, Second District HMW:kc cc: Tom Mathews, EMA COSTA MESA-CYPRESS-GARDEN GROVE•HUNTiNGTON BEACH-LOS AL AMROS-ROSSMOOR•SANTA ANA-SEAL BEACH•STANTON•SUNSET BEACH . H ND.too AImj CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Lep" INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Connie Brockway,City Clerk 01(� SUBJECT: Bolsa Chica Letter from Supervisor Harriett M.Wieder Dated February 9, 1994 DATE: February 10, 1994 Attached is a letter received today from Supervisor Harriett Wieder regarding the Bolsa Chica EIR public hearing process. The copies sent to me from the Supervisor's Office to distribute to you were all accidentally addressed to Councilmember Sullivan and that is why you do not each have an individual letter. CB jh Enclosure cc: Michael T.Uberuaga,City Administrator Melanie Fallon,Director of Community Development Gail Hutton,City Attorney BOLSAEIR HARRIETT M . A IEDER SUPERVISOR. SECOND DISTRICT r ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION 1 h, J 10 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA. P_ 0- BOX 687. SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA 92702-0687 PHONE (714) 834-3220 ,-AX (7.4) 834-6109 February 9, 1994 The Honorable Dave Sullivan Councilman City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, C 92648 Dear Councilma. I . Thank you for your letter of January 28, 1994 regarding the public hearing process applicable to the Bolsa Chica Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Although it might not be apparent, we do share the desire to provide the people of Huntington Beach every opportunity to comment on the EIR. However, I remain concerned that the limited experience of the Huntington Beach City Council in addressing documents as complex as the Bolsa Chica EIR have lead to some unfortunate misunderstandings. As you well know, the County also desires public input into this important issue. We anticipate the written transcript of the testimonies provided at the January 31, 1994 public meeting. This input into the public review process will allow us to respond to all the comments received. Furthermore, because public comment is so important, I have directed the County Planning Commission to hold a public hearing in Huntington Beach after the close of the EIR comment and response period. I anticipate this hearing will take place in May 1994, at which time all interested parties will be invited to testify on the proposed project. It is my hope that the presentation made by Mr. Tom Mathews of the County's Environmental Management Agency (EMA) at your January 31, 1994 public meeting has since clarified the County's complex EIR process for you and your fellow council members. However, in the unfortunate event that questions remain on the County's EIR process and intent for public input, I would like to invite you and two other council members to meet with EMA staff in my office within the next two weeks. In this manner, we can put any confusion to rest and move forward together on the important work of the restoration of the Bolsa Chica. Please let my office know when you or other members of the council, as designated by the Mayor, would be available to meet. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, HARRIETT M.WIEDER Supervisor, Second District cc: Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson Huntington Beach City Council Supervisor Thomas F. Riley, Chairman of the Board Tom Mathews, EMA COSTA MESA•CYPRECS-GARDEN GROVE•HUNTINGTON BEACH•LOS ALAMITOS•ROSSMOOR•SANTA ANA•SEAL BEACH•STANTON•SUNSET BEACH br 61, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNT-NGTON BEACH 1A}VI i i To Department Heads From Mike A ams, Director Community Development Subject BOLSA CHICA LAND USE Date September 18, 1990 PLAN POLICIES The Bolsa Chica Planning Coalition is evaluating draft policy statements for the Bolsa Chica area . They have requested City staff to review and comment upon these policies . Attached are the draft policy statements for the proposed Bolsa Chica Land Use Plan. They will serve as guidance for future development plans . I will need your responses forwarded to Scott Hess of my staff by September 24 , 1990 . If you have any questions, please contact Scott . Thank you. SH: jr (7182d) r JEv; i i'! MEMORANDUM TO: Bolsa Chica Planning Coalition DATE: September 6, 1990 FROM: Mel MalkoA.✓ SUBJECT: BOLSA CHICA; Revised SP/LCP Policies The revised set of Bolsa Chica SP/LCP policies enclosed herewith reflect the results of our several meetings on these, and related technical components. You'll note that the "Wetlands Restoration Plan/Implementation Program" will now be separated into two parts,with the LUP containing a Wetlands Restoration Plan (Chapter 3) and the IAP containing the Wetlands Implementation Program (Chapter 5). Other changes include some terminology in Component headings to more closely mirror those used in the existing Certified Coastal Element, as well as a reorganization of the water quality policies. In some policy sections, I have eliminated those policies that are already adequately addressed in the Certified Coastal Element or elsewhere (e.g., the City's Seismic-Safety Element, and the City's Oil Code). In addition, some new policies, including a general policy (see Policy Number 2) as well as one pertaining to flc odplain management(No. 6 p),have been added. Based on a recent suggestion by Tom Pratt,I have introduced the usage of the term "jetty-stabilized tidal inlet", or"tidal inlet" for short. The other portions of the SP/LCP will be modified accordingly. I look forward to receipt of any comments, suggestions,corrections, etc. once you have had an opportunity to review these policies. Table of Contents Chapter 2 LAND USE PLAN AND POLICIES 2-1 2.1 Land Use Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 Land Use Plan Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2.1 General Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2.2 Biological Resources Management Policies . . . . . . . . . 2-2 2.2.3 Water Resources and Shoreline Policies . . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 2.2.4 Physical and Cultural Resources Policies . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 2.2.5 Recreation and Shoreline Access Policies . . . . . . . . . . 2-8 2.2.6 '1�ransportation Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10 2.2.7 Energy Facilities Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11 2.2.8 Public Works Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12 2.2.9 New ResidentiaVCommercial Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-13 2.2.10 Community Design and Visual/Scenic Resources Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-13 2.2.11 Phasing an. d Financing Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14 i Chapter 2 LAND USE PLAN AND POLICIES 2.1 Land Use Plan [To be provided as part of October 15, 1990 "merged"draft SP/LCP.] 2.2 Land Use Plan Policies The Land Use Plan policies that follow have been developed to guide development in the Bolsa Chica Study Area. In some cases, policies are broad and intended to assist where potentially conflicting goals exist, by setting forth guidance on what plan elements should be given greatest consideration, etc. Other policies have been written to address very precise issues associated with Bolsa Chica and not necessarily applicable to the other coastal areas of the City of Huntington Beach. The LUP policies will apply to all development within Bolsa Chica, now and in the future. Accordingly, additional guidance in interpreting and applying these policies may be gained from a review of information contained in each of the corresponding components in Chapter 3 of this LUP. 2.2.1 General Policies 1. Where policies within the Bolsa Chica Land Use Plan overlap, the policy which is the most protective of coastal resources and consistent with the Biological Resources Management Component Policies (Section 2.2.2) shall take precedence. 2. Where the Bolsa Chica Land Use Plan policies are silent on any given subject, relevant policies contained in the City's Certified Coastal Element (1985 and as amended) shall apply. 3. Where there are conflicts at Bolsa Chica between the policies set forth in the Bolsa Chica Land Use Plan and those set forth in any element of the City's General Plan, City's Coastal Element (covering other portions of the City's coastal zone), existing ordinances, or other Citywide plans, the policies of this Bolsa Chica Land Use Plan shall take precedence. 4. In the event of any ambiguities or silence of the LUP not resolved by Policies 1 through 3 above, or other LUP provisions, the policies of the Coastal Act shall guide interpretation of this SP/LCP. 916190 2-1 Draft SP/LCP 2.2.2 Biological Resources Management Policies Wetlands and ESHAs 5. Fish and wildlife values encompassed within the Bolsa Chica planning area shall be enhanced through..expansion of wetland acreage and through restoration and enhancement programs. 6. The term "wetlands" in this Bolsa Chica Specific Plan/Local Coastal Program shall mean those lands so identified and delineated in the February 10, 1989 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report entitled "A Determination of the Geographical Extent of Waters of the United States at Bolsa Chica, Orange County, California." 7. A minimum of 1,000 acres of wetlandWestuarine habitats shall be preserved, restored, and maintained within the Bolsa Chica Study Area. 8. The Wetlands Restoration Plan, and the Wetlands Implementation Program, shall be governed by the following principles: a. Establishment of a minimum of 1,000 acres of wetlands,/estuarine habitat providing high biological productivity and habitat diversity. b. Creation of approximately 37.8 acres of wetland buffers. c. Wetland buffer elements to protect wetland habitat shall be of adequate width and character to reduce disturbance factors from adjacent urban development, and subject to approval by the California Department of Fish and Game. d. Approximately 73.6 acres of ESHAs which shall be preserved and/or relocated in the Bolsa Chica Study Area, of which 22.6 acres are located within the Linear Regional Park (above the +5-foot MSL contour) and 51.0 acres are located in the Bolsa lowland (generally below the +5-foot MSL contour). e. Wetland/ESHA restoration or enhancement designs consistent with low operation and maintenance costs. f. Compatibility of public and private development, whenever possible, consistent with restoration and resource protection needs, including present and future oil operations, with wetlands restoration. g. High predictability of success of wetlands restoration and ESHA relocation, and establishment of criteria for evaluating such success. h. Protection and/or restoration of endangered species habitat. i. Assurance of water of sufficient quality and quantity to provide for high productivity in the wetlands. j. Protection of the wetlands from any significant adverse impacts emanating from urban areas. 9/6190 2-2 Draft SP/LCP k. Retention of all ESHAs in place whenever feasible, but when necessary, ESHAs may be relocated. If relocation is necessary, ESHAs may be relocated within the Bolsa Chica Study Area, including on the slope face of the Huntington Mesa. Linear Regional Park design may provide for the relocation of some but not all ESHAs while accommodating public recreational values and uses. The California Department of Fish and Game shall have final approval of ESHA relocation. L . Compensation of fish and wildlife habitats in the form of replacement habitat which, at a minimum, duplicates those values lost. m. Phasing of wetlands restoration and enhancement, lowland urban development and oil operations. n. Identification of the funding source(s) for wetlands restoration, operation, maintenance and a monitoring program. o. Provision of educational opportunities and scientific research where feasible. p. A two-step transfer of title of designated wetland/ESHA/open space area to a designated agency or organization. 9. To the maximum extent feasible, oil facilities shall be sited so as not to conflict with wetlands restoration. 10. Wetland and ESHAs shall be protected from intrusion by feral/domestic animals. 11. Wetlands restoration activities and lowland regional infrastructure improvements shall commence concurrently with, and proceed as expeditiously as possible after, issuance of the Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit and all other necessary approvals. 12. Urban construction and wetland restoration activities shall be conducted so as to minimize adverse impacts to existing wildlife resources. Any unavoidable adverse impacts shall be mitigated to levels of insignificance. Wetland and ESHA Phasing 13. No urban development as proposed in the LUP shall occur in the Bolsa Chica LCP Segment Area prior to Coastal Commission approval with the Wetlands Restoration Plan and Implementation Program. 14. No portion of the habitat of any endangered species shall be disturbed for development until an area of equivalent habitat value has been established and its maintenance assured. Prior to development on non-tidal pickleweed saltmarsh, pickleweed saltmarsh of equivalent quality shall be created, or existing pickleweed saltmarsh shall be enhanced so that no reduction in carrying capacity for the Belding's savannah sparrow shall result from permitted development. Additionally, and consistent with the wetland design criteria established by the Wetlands Restoration Plan, the area of 9/6/90 2-3 Draft SP/LCP pickleweed saltmarsh available for the Belding's savannah sparrow shall not be less than 200 acres at any time. 15. Development shall be permitted only after the Wetlands Restoration Plan and the Wetlands Implementation Program have been reviewed and approved by the City and Coastal Commission and all other applicable restoration plan policies have been met. Urban lowland development cannot commence until all mitigation requirements for such development are completed in accordance with Policy 16, below. 16. Prior to or concurrent with any grading for development in the lowland, there shall be restored a wetland area equal in size or habitat values, at landowner's option, to the wetland area, as mapped by EPA, which grading will impact in the lowland, pursuant to guidelines contained in the Wetlands Implementation Program and approved by affected wildlife agencies. 17. The Wetlands Implementation Program shall provide a system for "banking" credit accumulated for any amount of restoration completed by either public or private agencies. 18. Where wetlands acreage above 852 acres is to be restored but land within the designated wetlands restoration areas is unavailable, due to oil operations for example, interim on- or off-site restoration may be accomplished with the former being of higher priority. If interim off-site restoration is chosen, it shall be completed only if: a. two acres shall be restored for each acre lost; b. at the earliest feasible opportunity, but in no case later than final phase of development, the restoration shall be completed on-site; and, c. upon replacement of interim off-site restored wetlands with the required on-site restored wetlands, said interim off-site wetlands shall be permanently maintained and protected. 19. Prior to the initiation of any development which results in adverse impacts to ESHA habitat types, ESHAs of equivalent size, character, and/or quality shall be created and functioning so that there is no net loss of existing ESHA values within the SP/LCP Study Area. ESHAs preserved and/or relocated within Bolsa Chica shall be composed of those elements and respective acreages described in the Wetlands Restoration Plan. If ESHA acreage is unavailable for replacement on-site, e.g., due to oil operations, the landowner/applicant may create ESHA habitats off-site on a temporary basis under the following conditions: 916190 2-4 Draft SP(LCP a. two acres shall be created off-site for each on-site acre lost; b. at the earliest feasible opportunity, but in no case later than final phase of development, ESHA preservation/replacement of the required acreage shall be completed on-site; and, c. upon replacement of iriteriin off-site created ESHA with the required on-site ESHA acreage, said interim off-site ESHA shall be maintained and protected. 20. Bolsa Chica has been planned as a single, integrated plan to restore, permanently protect, and maintain the wetland system, while allowing development in the Study Area. As provided in the WIP, title to all lands designated for wetlands or ESHA shall be conveyed to a public agency or other approved organization capable of protection and/or enhancement of fish, wildlife and other environmental values identified in the Wetlands Restoration Plan, and approved by the Huntington Beach City Council and Coastal Commission Executive Director. Prior to any grading on the Bolsa Chica Mesa, the property owner/developer initiating the grading shall do one of the following: a. Convey to the approved agency or organization a legal or equitable interest in that property owner's/developer's lands which are designated in the Land Use Plan for wetlands,/ESHA/open space, subject to receipt of fair market value or other equitable compensation pursuant to mechanisms contained in the WIP. The interest(s) conveyed shall be, at a minimum, the same number of wetland acres shown on the Land Use Plan for residential development owned by the applicant in the lowland. b. For any land for which a legal or equitable interest has not been conveyed pursuant to (a) above, the property owner/developer may: i. Place all or a portion of such lands in a private trust for wetlands restoration purposes; or ii. Convey to the approved agency or other organization a conservation easement for wetlands restoration purposes; or iii. Sell all or a portion of such lands for the purpose of wetland mitigation providing such buyers agree to convey said property to the approved agency or organization above, in accordance with the terms of the Wetlands Implementation Program. 916/90 2-5 Draft SP/LCP 2.2.3 Water Resources and Shoreline Policies Water Quality 21. Deposition of dredge spoils shall not adversely affect water quality or marine habitats, nor shall dredge-spoil deposition result in either a net loss of wetlands acreage or wetland habitat values. Further, such deposition shall be compatible with the requirements of Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act, Section 10 of the Federal Rivers and Harbors Act, as well as State and Federal Endangered Species Acts. 22. Any impact to the water quality of the wetlands due to oil operations shall be mitigated, as necessary, in accordance with applicable federal, State, and/or local laws and regulations, and in conformance with the Biological Resources Management Policies (Section 2.2.2) and Energy Facilities Policies (Section 2.2.7) contained in this LUP. Shoreline Structures/Processes 23. The following parameters shall apply to the jetty-stabilized tidal inlet: a. that the tidal inlet plan is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative, as defined in the Coastal Act; b. that implementation of the tidal inlet is consistent with all other applicable policies of the LUP and the Coastal Act; c. that the tidal inlet supports the requirements of the Wetlands Restoration Plan as provided in this LUP, such that all new tidal areas shall be designed to promote water circulation appropriate to wetland values and functioning; d. that, consistent with wetland restoration needs, the location of the new tidal inlet and the hydraulic regime within Bolsa Chica shall be designed to mitigate any potential adverse effects on the existing Huntington Harbour waterway system; e. that the tidal inlet will have no significant unmitigable adverse impacts on sand supply, beach profile, coastal access and recreational values of Bolsa Chica State Beach, or oilfield operations; where significant impacts are likely to occur, they must be able to be mitigated to levels of insignificance unless significant overriding public benefits exist; f. that an effective program of institutional and financing arrangements adequate to eliminate or mitigate to levels of insignificance any identified impacts has been developed and will be carried out as part of the Wetlands Implementation Program; and, g. that maintenance, operations, and liability responsibilities have been identified and are acceptable to each of the appropriate public agencies. 9/6190 2-6 Draft SP/LCP 2.2.4 Physical and Cultural Resources Policies Geotechnical Hazards Policies 24. Standards for setbacks from active fault zones shall be established to the satisfaction of the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) that reflect the results of on-site geotechnical studies. 25. All lowland urban development areas shall be designed and constructed according to standards that minimize liquefaction potential to the satisfaction of CDMG. 26. Structures for human occupancy shall be located outside of areas of liquefiable soils unless specific mitigation measures are developed in consultation with CDMG. As specified by the CDMG letter to Woodward- Clyde Consultants, signed by E.R. Wilkinson and dated February 22, 1985, mitigation measures shall be sufficient to withstand a repeatable site acceleration of 0.25g. 27. [INCLUSION, MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF THIS POLICY IS PENDING CITYATTORNEY'S REVIEW.] City shall require a waiver of liability for all geologic hazards for development in those sections of the Bolsa Chica planning area identified as subject to potential geologic hazards. The waiver shall be in the form of a deed restriction for recording, free of prior liens except tax liens that binds the applicant and any successors in interest. The waiver shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and City Attorney, and shall provide: a) that the applicants) understand that the site may be subject to extraordinary geologic hazards from faulting, liquefaction and/or subsidence, and unconditionally waive any claim of liability on the part of the City or any other public agency for any damage from such hazards; and b) the applicant(s) understand construction in the face of these possible known hazards may make them ineligible for public disaster funds or loans for repair, replacement, or rehabilitation of the property in the event of faulting, liquefaction and/or subsidence. 28. Subsidence monitoring programs, to be implemented by the City, shall be continued for the life of the project. All grading plans and habitat enhancement designs shall take into account the estimated amount of subsidence over a 50-year period and shall establish elevations to maintain to appropriate vertical distances above tidal and flood datums. 29. New development shall comply with the policies and guidelines of the Seismic-Safety Element of the General Plan, as well as the latest Uniform Building Code. 30. All surface and subsurface drainage resulting from development shall be constructed so that it will not contribute to the erosion of the bluff face or the stability of the bluff itself. 916/90 2-7 Draft SP/LCP Air Quality 31. Proposed land uses shall be consistent with all existing local, state and federal air quality laws and regulations. Cultural Resources Pblicies 32. All planning for Bolsa Chica shall comply with adopted City policies as related to cultural and scientific resources to ensure that all reasonable and proper steps shall be taken to achieve the preservation of archaeological and paleontological remains or, in the alternative, measures shall be provided to assure the recovery, identification and analysis of such resources so that their scientific and historical values are preserved. 33. If development is proposed for areas of known or previously identified archaeological site where resources may still exist, a qualified archaeologist shall be on-site to monitor grading activities. 34. If archaeological resources are discovered during any construction phase of the project, all activity which could damage or destroy these resources shall be temporarily suspended until the site has been examined by a qualified archaeologist and mitigation measures have been developed to address the impacts of the project on the archaeological resources. 35. If development is proposed for areas where historic cultural resources are located, impacts of the project shall be assessed and mitigation measures shall be developed to reduce project impacts prior to development. 2.2.5 Recreation and Shoreline Access Policies 36. A system of public trails shall be established, connecting Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park with the State Beach, for the benefit of all residents within Bolsa Chica and surrounding communities. 37. All recreational facilities shall be landscaped with specific emphasis placed on the use of native California vegetation. Irrigation, where necessary and prudent, shall be minimized and use of reclaimed water encouraged, where feasible. 38. Access shall be provided to the ocean shoreline and public recreational areas in conjunction with wetlands restoration and new residential development as follows, such that there shall be no unreasonable interference with oilfield operations, for public safety or other reasons: a. Along the Bolsa Chica-Garfield Connector from the Linear Regional Park to the Bolsa Chica Mesa (including a Class I, off-road, bicycle trail along the seaward side of this connector road). b. Along the edge (i.e., slope face) of the Bolsa Chica Mesa, from the Bolsa Chica-Garfield Connector to Warner Avenue. 9/6190 2-8 Draft SPILCP c. Adjacent to Warner Avenue with a Class II trail from Mesa Connector to Warner Avenue/Pacific Coast Highway intersection. d. Through the Linear Regional Park, across Pacific Coast Highway, to Bolsa Chica State Beach. e. To access nodes (e.g., overlooks, interpretive amenities) associated with wetlands and the Linear Regional Park. f.. A Class II trail along Graham Street, from the Graham Street bridge over Wintersburg Flood Control Channel to the intersection of Graham and the Cross-Gap Connector. 39. All bikeways shall be located and constructed in accordance with the City Master Plan of Bikeways in effect at the time of development. 40. A network of roadway-separated and on-road bicycle and pedestrian trails shall link Huntington Central Park, Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park, Bolsa Chica State Beach and the State Ecological Reserve. 41. Visual access shall be provided through the location of scenic overlooks where physical access to a particular area (e.g., wetlands, ESHAs, etc.) may not be appropriate. Such access shall be designed in coordination with CDFG and shall be consistent with resource protection needs. Visual access opportunities shall be protected for long-term public use. 42. Trails through and along wetlands buffers will be carefully planned to protect wildlife resources by minimizing the potential for disturbance, while also affording opportunities for overlooks, interpretive materials, and resting areas. 43. The maintenance and enhancement of public non-vehicular access to the shoreline shall be of primary importance when evaluating future improvements in the coastal zone, both public and private. 44. The ownership/maintenance of the project-wide system of trails shall be the responsibility of a public agency. 45. Visitor-serving establishments shall be located, designed- and operated primarily to serve the needs of coastal-dependent uses. Such establishments shall not create unmitigable traffic congestion or hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic by reason of their location, construction, manner or timing of operations, or parking arrangements. 46. The construction of the tidal inlet shall avoid, to the maximum extent feasible, impacts to existing concession stand(s), appurtenant structures, and/or restroom facilities on the State Beach. Any impacts on these facilities shall be mitigated such that overall recreation enjoyment of the beach area is not diminished. 47. The precise boundary of the Linear Regional Park shall be determined concurrent with, but separate from the certification process for, this SP/LCP. Any general development plan for the Park, when prepared, shall be consistent with the Wetlands Restoration Plan. 9/6/90 2-9 Draft SP/LCP 48. The ownership/maintenance of the Linear Regional Park shall be the responsibility of the County of Orange and/or the City of Huntington Beach. Management of any and all ESHAs sited within the Linear Regional Park shall be provided by the Linear Regional Park Operator, in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. 2.2.6 Transportation Policies BCPC Note: The following three policies, pertaining to circulation, are NOT FINALIZED; inclusion or deletion of various roadway segments in the LUP is still pending further review by City and County. These policies will be revised at the direction of the City. 49. The circulation system for the Bolsa Chica project area shall be consistent with the City of Huntington Beach's Circulation Planl, except to the extent that amendment of that Circulation Plan is required for consistency with the results and recommendations of the 1990 Joint County/City Traffic Modeling Study regarding the final configuration of roadways within the Bolsa Chica Study Area. Among these revisions, which have also been made to reflect the BCPC's Concept Plan, is the demonstrated need for the Cross- Gap Connector and the extensions of Graham, Talbert and Springdale Streets to the Cross-Gap Connector. 50. Bolsa Chica Street shall be extended as a scenic, modified secondary roadway to connect with Garfield Avenue (as the Cross-Gap Connector), and its 90-foot cross-section shall include a maximum of four travel lanes and a raised median. 51. The Cross-Gap ;Connector and extensions of Graham, Talbert and Springdale Streets shall incorporate design features to satisfy all applicable state and local noise attenuation regulations, and shall, in addition, satisfy the following requirements: a. Cross-Gap Connector traffic-induced noise shall be attenuated by roadway location and any other needed mitigation measures so that this noise source shall not increase noise levels in adjacent existing residential neighborhoods beyond applicable local and State standards. b. Noise levels in new residential development contiguous with the Cross-Gap Connector shall meet the standards for residential development set forth by applicable laws and regulations. c. Noise generated as a result of any extensions of Graham, Talbert and Springdale Streets shall meet the standards for residential development set forth by applicable laws and regulations. 1.Note that the City Council adopted an "Errata" version of the Circulation Plan, and this revised plan will be submitted to the Coastal Commission as part of a proposed amendment of the 1985 Certified Coastal Element. (temporary footnote for BCPC reviewers) 9/6/90 2-10 Draft SP/LCP d. Any measures deemed necessary to mitigate noise impacts of new development on existing neighborhoods shall be developed prior to approval of any tract maps. 52. The major and primary roadway facilities for the Bolsa Chica project shall adequately accommodate the projected future transit demands of the Orange County Transit District. 53. Walkways and bicycle trails shall be provided in conjunction with new development. Development shall be designed to encourage the use of transit services and bicycles as alternative modes of transportation. 54. All roads and trails shall be constructed to ultimate City standards as a condition of approval of Coastal Development Permits (CDPs), Site Plans, Conditional Use Permits, and/or Tentative Subdivision Maps pursuant to, and consistent with, the Bolsa Chica Specific PlarVLCP. 2.2.1 Energy Facilities Policies Note: "Energy" and "Oil" facilities, operations, production, etc., are used interchangeably in this SP/LCP. Also, energy or oil production would more properly be termed "hydrocarbon production" (in industry jargon), inasmuch as other products are produced in the local oilfield besides oil, e.g., natural gas. 55. Upon annexation of the unincorporated lands at Bolsa Chica into the City, oil faacilities and operations shall, in addition to applicable state regulations, be governed by the Huntington Beach Oil Code. Further, the City's Certified Coastal Element provides extensive policy guidance for oil facilities and operations within the Bolsa Chica Study Area. 56. The LUP shall imply no modification of the legal status of any portion of the Study Area currently used for oil production activities so as to preclude or modify the ability to continue oil production operations. 57. Oil operators shall use their best efforts to produce remaining reserves in a timely, efficient, and environmentally unobtrusive manner so as to allow for the earliest possible restoration, enhancement and relocation of various wildlife habitats within Bolsa Chica. 58. As oil production facilities located within lands designated as wetlands,/ESHA/open space are phased out over the long-term, these sites shall be converted to wildlife habitat in accordance with the Wetlands Restoration Plan. 59. Energy facilities and production-related operations shall be coordinated and consistent with the Wetlands Restoration Plan and the Wetlands Implementation Program. The following considerations are of particular importance to the long-term viability of wetlands and other habitats at Bolsa Chica: 9/6190 2-11 Draft SP/LCP a. Standards and control measures for operator access and limitation of oilfield activity impacts on adjacent wildlife habitats (e.g., runoff, vehicles, lights, noise). b. Water level management and flood prevention measures to protect access roads, wells, and runoff water quality. c. Subsidence mitigation if required by the California Division of Oil and Gas or the City of Huntington Beach (upon annexation of affected lands). d. Relationships and responsibilities among the landowners and oil lessees with regard to the utilization of surface properties for oil operations, including financial and/or funding provisions. 60. Any relocation of oil-related facilities required in the future shall be fully consistent with the Biological Resources Management Policies (Section 2.2.2), provided that no such facilities shall be relocated into areas that have - been restored. 2.2.8 Public Works Policies 61. All major utilities shall be placed underground. 62. Utilities shall be located outside the wetlands and environmentally sensitive habitat areas unless there is no other feasible, less environmentally damaging alternative as defined in the Coastal Act. Mitigation measures shall be provided to minimize adverse environmental effects of any utilities located in these areas, including utilities directly related to oil production, wetland restoration/ESHA relocation and maintenance, as well as flood and water quality control. 63. All water and wastewater facilities shall be installed to the requirements and specifications of the Huntington Beach Engineering Department and Department of Public Works, in consultation with County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC). 64. Resource-conserving water devices shall be required in all new development. 65. New development at Bolsa Chica shall comply with Federal and State floodplain management policies. 66. The East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Flood Control Channel within the Bolsa Chica Study Area shall be improved to provide 100-year flood protection, and shall be designed in accordance with applicable Orange County Flood Control District drainage standards in effect when filing for permits to construct such facilities and/or improvements. The East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Flood Control Channel shall be maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District. 9/6/90 2-12 Draft S P/LCP i • 2.2.9 New Residential/Commercial Policies 67. THIS POLICY IS ON HOLD, PENDING RESOLUTION OF DENSITY/INTENSITY ISSUES:: The following Land Use categories are amended into the City of Huntington Beach General Plan Land Use Element and shall guide new development in the Bolsa Chica Specific Plan/LCP Area in accordance with Land Use Regulations set forth in the IAP see Chapter 6 of this SP/LCP): Lowland District-CC (LD-CC): Maximum density = 6.5 du/ac, with Coastal Conservation Suffix (-CC) added2 Mesa District One (MDI): Maximum density = 6.5 du/ac Mesa District Two (MD2): Average density = 12.5 du/ac Mesa District Three (MD3): Average density = 18.0 du/ac 68. THIS POLICY IS ON HOLD, PENDING RESOLUTION OF DENSITYIINTENSITY ISSUES:: Limited commercial uses, designed to serve the local community and/or visitor-serving facilities (including, but not limited to a Bolsa Chica Interpretive Center), are allowed in accordance with Land Use Regulations set forth in the IAP see Chapter 6, Section 6.8). 69. New development shall comply with all provisions of the Housing Element and other elements of the General Plan at the time of certification of this SP/LCP. t 70. All development adjacent to wildlife habitats shall be designed and regulated to avoid unmitigable adverse impacts on habitat resources. Regulatory or design measures may include buffer areas, walls, berms, landscaping and grading controls, noise restrictions, and/or control of urban runoff. 2.2.10 Community Design and Visual/Scenic Resources Policies 71. A Master Landscape Plan shall be prpepared as part of the IAP, including a master landscape plan for all arterial roadways. 72. Graded slopes shall be oriented to minimize visual impacts to surrounding areas. 73. Prior to the initiation of grading activities, a soils report shall be performed that analyzes on-site soil conditions and includes appropriate measures to control erosion and dust. 2.The LD-CC District is established to allow for a"Restoration Project"in the Bolsa Lowland(see Chapter 3, Section 3.1 and Chapter 6, Section 6.5). 9/6/90 2-13 Draft SPiLcP • 74. Conceptual grading plans shall be prepared and submitted in concert with tentative subdivision maps. 75. Major backbone drainage/flood facilities shall be maintained by the Orange County Flood Control District. Local drainage devices will be maintained by a Community Services Agency,.homeowners association(s), or by the City. 2.2.11 Phasing and Financing Policies 76. A Master Phasing Plan shall be prepared as part of SP/LCP and shall include precise descriptions of the types and intensities of uses in the Land Use Plan. The Master Phasing Plan shall be consistent with wetlands/ESHA restoration phasing policies contained in the Biological Resources Management Component and shall take into account the phasing of oilfield facilities. 77. A financing, operation and maintenance plan for the jetty-stabilized tidal inlet shall be established, and shall include the following elements: a. Provision for monitoring of the beach for the life of the project, after completion of any tidal inlet and related structures. b. Establishing financial and institutional arrangements that will assure adequate funding to mitigate potential impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Bolsa Chica Specific PlarVLocal Coastal Program. 78. Subject to terms of a development agreement(s) or other agreements, all property owned b� Signal Bolsa Corporation, or its successors in interest, in the area designated for the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park shall be dedicated by Signal to the County or City of Huntington Beach. 9/6/90 2-14 Draft SP/LCP City of Huntington Beach + 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 !+ OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Telephone(7 14)536-5553 February 5, 1990 The Honorable Harriett M. Wieder Orange County Supervisor-District 2 10 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92702-0687 Dear Harriett: Re: Bolsa Chica Cross Gap Connector Now that the City Council has adopted a plan for the Holly-Seacliff area, and the Bolsa Chica Planning Coalition is pursuing a specific plan for the-Bolsa Chica, it is vitally important that the Coalition.and the City place a high priority on planning, designing, and os constructing the Crs Gap Connector between Bolsa Chica Street and Garfield Avenue. I am aware that there may be some concern from environmental interests and adjacent residents about potential impacts of this arterial highway. However, I am sure they can be mitigated with careful planning. What cannot be mitigated in any practical manner is the traffic congestion that would result in north Huntington Beach from developing the Holly-Seacliff and Bolsa Chica areas at their proposed densities and not constructing the cross gap connector in conjunction with these developments. In your deliberations with the Bolsa Chica Planning Coalition, please place the Cross Gap Connector at the top of the priority list of issues to resolve to the satisfaction of all the citizens of Huntington Beach and adjacent communities. If you would like to discuss this matter with me, feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, Tom Mays, Mayor TM:pf xc: City Council Department Heads Members of the Bolsa Chica Planning Coalition Mike Ruane Ron Tibbetts Anio,Japan SISTER CITIES N,•.. zcal,nd l- U13erva�� 19 �A-M S - ""ti, yU ��TyCfiy H��r,;�• HARRIETT M . WIEDER yT��JT�aTY�FR'r • t' w, - j CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORSCy , S + 6 SUPERVISOR,SECOND DISTRICT C441 2� F I,1 , ORANGE COUNTY HALL OF ADMINISTRATION 10 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA,P.0.BOX 687,SANTA ANA,CALI FORN IA 92702 PHONE:(714) 834.3220 • FAX (714) 834-6109 February 9, 1993 The Honorable Grace Winchell Mayor City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: Continued Coordination in the Bolsa Chica Planning Process Dear Grace: First, let me take this opportunity to offer my congratulations on becoming Mayor and also to the newly seated Council members. My affiliation with Council members over the years has always been cordial and positive and I look forward to continued warm and open relations with each of you under your newly constituted Council. These are certainly exciting times at both the County and municipal levels of government. The challenges that confront us both unquestionably call for the utmost in personal commitment and political fortitude. I want you to know that I am personally committed to strengthening our continued relationship and I want to express my interest in working with you and providing assistance where needed on any topic of mutual interest. A topic of significant interest is Bolsa Chica. I think each of you knows my position on this subject and certainly recognizes the importance of Bolsa Chica both regionally and locally. For this reason in 1989, 1 along with then Mayor, John Erskin, championed a reconciliation of long disputed issues through an intensive planning effort involving key interest groups. The result was the establishment of the Bolsa Chica Coalition Plan which, I believe, is the only viable basis for continued planning activity that can ultimately lead to restoration of the site and a fair land use entitlement. I would like to extend an offer to have the County Planning staff brief your Council on both the important historical aspects of the Bolsa Chica planning process, and perhaps more significant, the essential components 'of the Bolsa Chica Coalition Plan. I understand that the City Planning staff will be briefing you on Bolsa Chica potentially on February 22. If you would like, I can arrange to have County staff attend and participate in the presentation, or we can be prepare to make a separate presentation on another date. COSTA MESA•CYPRESS•GARDEN GROVE•HUNTINGTON BEACH•LOS ALAMITOS•ROSSMOOR•SANTA ANA•SEAL BEACH•STANTON•SUNSET BEACH The Honorable Grace Winchell February 9, 1993 Page 2 I'm looking forward to an invigorating year ahead in 1993. Let me again congratulate the new Council members and reiterate my personal pledge for continued cooperation and coordination on all matters of interest to us. Since r ly, HARRIETT M. WIEDER Chairman of the Board Supervisor, Second District HMW:c cc: Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator City Council From the Desk of. . . . Connie- bow inq 2/10/93 Connie: would you please see that a ll the council members get a copy of this I would greatly appreciate letter. sent out the it. I have already letter to Grace and a copy to X ke- Thanks again. ro Supervisor Harriett M-Wader,Second District Executive S Ord Cou and of penMsors _ my Board Su -_ I