Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Historic Preservation Commission (131) AGENDA ORO VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION January 11, 2010 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE CALL TO ORDER AT OR AFTER 5:00 P.M. ROLL CALL CALL TO THE AUDIENCE 1. Review and/or approyal of the December 14, 2009, HPC minutes. � CK(�N I I:Ip�'� 2. Discussion and possible action regarding scheduling of Special Session to review the Final Draft of the Cultural Resources Inventory. 3. Discussion of draft ordinance sections in relation to the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Project. 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Steam Pump Ranch: A. Staff Report. Ct :s _,,..,,,`B_ Update from Poster-Frost. *)11_,.7 1�� .. C. Membership and Duties of Steam Pump Ranch Project Group. 5. Update on training opportunities. A. SPR training session with SHPO. B. 2010 Arizona Statewide Historic Preservation Partnership Conference. 6. Discussion regarding future agenda items. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6 `""' ADJOURNMENT �,lu4Nmish) ),oi19 POSTED: 01 06 09 CD tr. 0 t` 3:00 p.m. rg When possible, a packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the Commission meeting in the office of the Town Clerk between the hours of 8:00 a.m. — 5:00p.m. The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the Town Clerk's Office at least five days prior to the Commission meeting at 229-4700. INSTRUCTIONS TO SPEAKERS Members of the public have the right to speak during any posted public hearing. However, those items not listed as a public hearing are for consideration and action by the Commission during the course of their business meeting. Members of the public may be allowed to speak on these topics at the discretion of the Chair. IfY ou wish to address the Commission on any item(s) on this agenda, please complete a speaker card located on the Agenda table at the back of the room and give it to the Recording Secretary. Please indicate on the speaker card which item number and topic you wish to speak on, or ifY ou wish to speak during "Call to Audience", please specify what you wish to discuss when completing the blue speaker card. Please step forward to the podium when the Chair announces the item(s) on the agenda which you are interested in addressing. 1. Please state your name and whether or not you are a Town resident. 2. Speak only on the issue currently being discussed by Commission. Please organize your speech, you will only be allowed to address the Commission once regarding the topic being discussed. 3. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. 4. During "Call to Audience" you may address the Commission on any issue you wish. 5. Any member of the public speaking must speak in a courteous and respectful manner to those present. Thank you for your cooperation. "Notice of Possible Quorum of the Oro Valley Town Council, Boards, Commissions and Committees: In accordance with Chapter 3, Title 38, Arizona Revised Statutes and Section 2-4-2 of the Oro Valley Town Code, a majority of the Town Council, Historic Preservation Commission, Development Review Board, Planning &Zoning Commission and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board may attend the above referenced meeting as a member of the audience only." 1 MINUTES ORO VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION December 14, 2009 ORO VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE CALL TO ORDER AT OR AFTER 5:00 P.M. Chair Zwiener called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Daniel Zwiener, Chair Lois Nagy, Vice-Chair Bob Baughman, Commissioner Ed Hannon, Commissioner Sam McClung, Commissioner Valerie Pullara, Commissioner CALL TO THE AUDIENCE Opened and closed without comment. 1. Review and/or approval of the November 16, 2009, HPC minutes. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Baughman and seconded by Commissioner Hannon to approve the November 16, 2009, HPC meeting minutes as amended. MOTION carried, 6-0. 2. Discussion and possible action regarding Cultural Resources Inventory. A. Phase I Inventory draft document. John Ravesloot, William Self Associates, Inc. (WSA), OV resident, reviewed the following comments: - clarification - reorganization of the chapters - improving the historic chapter - executive summary page - digitized maps - references on historic contacts - overall summary Mr. Ravesloot stated there had to be a way to generate interest within the Town to get the informationsuggested out, and su ested that the Commission work on public outreach for nexty ear. Mr. Ravelsoot stated the information could be athered and put in a four page brochure, which would be relatively g inexpensive. Paul Popelka, OV Acting Planning & Zoning Director (P&Z), stated once it the brochure could be posted on the Town website, and minimal is accepted, urchase. copies made for display at the Town Hall and Library, or available for purchase. Mr. Ravesloot stated that he hopes to have the final draft ready for the HPC meeting on January 11th. Chair Zwiener and Commissioner McClung expressed an interest in reviewing it prior to the HPC meeting. Mr. gg Popelka suggested to Mr. Ravesloot that to submit a digital file as opposed p to paper copy, for the Commission to review. Chair Zwiener stated if the report is not ready, then a special session would allow them to go over Phase I and recommendations for Phase II. Commissioner McClung stated it would be a good idea to get a press release after Town Council has considered it, to show the Town what has been done. B. Phase II survey recommendations. Commissioner Baughman stated the Town's history, presence, and future will benefit the historical preservation society. Vice-Chair Nagy stated the public thinks Steam Pump Ranch (SPR) is all the Town has and as part of the public outreach, SPR should be a part of it, but not the part.major Vice-Chair Nagy stated her agreement in using the brochure for public outreach so that the public can be informed about all the historic neighborhoods. Commissioner Baughman introduced a Town Council document titled, "Town Council, Advisory Boards and Commission Members Site Tours," and a Proposed Language for Town Council Policy document regarding ground disturbance on SPR property. Commissioner Baughman asked Mr. Ravesloot if he would be willing to volunteer as an archaeologist on an emergency basis if needed at the SPR. Mr. Ravesloot stated he would volunteer, as long as there was a monitoring plan. 3. Update on Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance. Chair Zwienergave an update regarding the work group, Town staff and David p Williams (ESL Consultant) progress on the preservation of Cultural Resources. Chair Zwiener stated the ESL project is in the early phases of drafting the ordinance language and are working on a research review process for post development. 4. Discussion and possible action regarding Historic Preservation Work Program. LP►I Mr. Popelka stated the sub-committee met several times to review the 2010-2012 Work Plan and would like to incorporate the Preservation Plan and Community Outreach into the P&Z Department Work Plan, because they may require some level of budget support. The other items would not be included because they are more related to strategic plans. Mr. Popelka recommended to the Commission to approve the 2010-2012 Work Plan so it could be incorporated into the P&Z Department Work Plan. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Baughman and seconded by Commissioner Hannon to approve the HPC 2010-2012 Work Plan as presented on December 10, 2009, and December 14, 2009. Mr. McClung requested clarification of the words "Continue to implement" on items #3 and #4 on the Work Plan under Preservation Plans. Commissioner Hannon stated when they worked with items 3 and 4 in the sub- committee, they were referring to the Master Plan and the Honey Bee Preservation Plan as published. MOTION carried, 6-0. Mr. Popelka offered an acknowledgement and thanks to Commissioners Pullara, Hannon, and Vice-Chair Nagy, for their assistance in putting the Work Plan together. 5. Discussion and possible action regarding Steam Pump Ranch. A. Tree Lighting Ceremony. Scott Nelson, OV Special Projects Coordinator, stated the Town hosted a program that included the tree lighting on December 4th and 5th, and was very well attended. Mr. Nelson stated they would be debriefing at the end of the week to see what improvements could be made next year. B Updateon exploratory removals in Pusch house and Carlos's residence. p Y Mr. Nelson gave the following updates: - Exploratory removal - Consultants should be ready to discuss issues next month - Evidence of adobe parapets - Site elevations at Pump House Mr. Nelson stated his concern that all the buildings at SPR are in need of a better Y drainage system. Mr. Nelson stated there would be some decisions and recommendations going to the Commission next month. Chair Zwiener stated the exploratory removals answered some key questions about the structure itself, and helped save a considerable amount of money. Commissioner McClung asked if there was a written and visual record being created during the exploration for presentation as to how it has been restored. Mr. Nelson stated they have taken photos documenting how everything was, along with notes and drawings. Commissioner Baughman asked Mr. Nelson if someone could sit down and write a narrative describing the process, while memories are still fresh. Mr. Nelson stated it was possible but finding the time would be an issue and is outside their scope on the contract. Chair Zwiener asked Mr. Nelson what discussion took place with Linda Mayro in regard to Carlos's residence. Mr. Nelson stated it was not addressed that day, but the last time they got together, Linda Mayro was not sure if she wanted the newer features to go away. Mr. Nelson stated he could see keeping Carlos's BBQ court and showing where Carlos's room was at, but the issue he raised with Linda Mayro was his concern that the eastern wall had moved 4-6 inches. Mr. Nelson stated it would be an ongoing discussion. C. Ground disturbance. Chair Zwiener stated there was a concern regarding the archaeology at the site, as well as forming a team that would be responsible for the recovery and preservation of the site. Chair Zwiener stated there was some ground disturbance activities and asked Mr. Nelson to bring the Commission up to date. Mr. Nelson stated a galvanized pipe broke off in the wall inside the residence while a building safetymember removed a toilet. The Assistant Building Official declared an emergencyand water was shut down to the entire site. Mr. Nelson gg stated the biggest issue for the buildings, other than fire, is water damage. Mr. Nelson stated theydid some selective ground disturbance trying to find the shut- off ff valves, which were never found. Mr. Nelson stated there is no call for bathrooms in the Master Plan, and no need for water except for irrigation. Mr. Nelson suggested fillingupone of the water tanks on site and to come up with a gg plan to shut the house off. Commissioner Baughman stated it is his intention to prevent any ground disturbance without an archaeologist being present. Chair Zwiener asked about the contract regarding the work on the three buildings anduttin an archaeology recovery and preservation plan together. p g Mr. Nelson stated by utilizing the existing contract and obtaining a qualified archaeological firm to survey, things could get moving quickly. Commissioner Baughman stated he would like to get the money committed. Chair Zwiener stated there is potential for artifact recovery and excavation needs to be handled carefully. Commissioner Baughman covered the language proposal document introduced earlier and wanted to offer it to the Town Council as policy in regards to the ground disturbance at SPR. MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Baughman and seconded by Vice-Chair Nagy to approve the adoption of the proposed language regarding ground disturbance on Steam Pump Ranch as a proposal to the Town Council as Town Council policy. Discussion: Commission McClung stated the last phrase in the second sentence should be stricken, because it puts the Chair in an awkward position to have to be available when an emergency arises. Commissioner Baughman stated he felt Town Council would object because they would want the Chair to be notified. Chair Zwiener stated it is a much larger issue in regards to the Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL) ordinance. One of the provisions in the ESL ordinance is to develop a list of qualified archaeologist consultants for situations like this. Chair Zwiener stated he is in favor of the language, but troubled by the provision. Commissioner Baughman stated he would accept as a friendly amendment to substitute the word "provide" with the words "make provision for." Mr. Popelka stated we could adopt the same list of archaeologists used by Pima p Count . Mr. Popelka recommended that rather than taking the language forth as Y p a Town Councilolic , it should be incorporated in the SPR Site Access Protocol p Y which should go to Council next month. Commissioner Baughman stated it was considered but dismissed it because, in an emergency situation it will be Town Staff with a shovel, and putting it in the g Y Access Protocol will not cover this situation. Chair Zwiener stated he was using his discretion in recognizing Mr. Bill Adler to speak. Mr. Adler stated the Town is responsible for SPR property and working to stabilize it. The language is impractical and not necessary. Mr. Adler stated that the Commission has to trust the people that have this responsibility because the Town cannot afford to hire the staff. Mr. Adler recommended revising some of the language and removing some of the mandates. Mr. Adler asked that the Commission be kept advised and to trust the people to call in experts when needed. Commissioner Baughman stated a planned function would not be a problem, but this language would apply when there is digging and an archaeologist is not present. Commissioner McClung stated the commissions are in place to advise the Town Council rather than putting forth a policy that may be defeated. Commissioner Baughman stated the easement is legally binding and it might be ag ood idea to ask the Town Attorney to do a summary of prohibitions and requirements of the IGA easement. Commissioner Baughman stated he would like to endorse this language without a time frame. Chair Zwiener stated he would like to see this on the next agenda in developing the language as a part of the recovery and preservation plan for the site. The motion was withdrawn by Commissioner Baughman and seconded by Vice-Chair Nagy. D. Formation of Budget Task Force. Chair Zwiener stated that due to the increased activity and the demands on getting budget the bud et money going, the Commission needs to develop a project team covering the preservation plan for SPR. Chair Zwiener stated it would be a good idea to developthis team consisting of Town staff, HPC Chair, the outside consultant, and other commissions who might be interested in participating that can meet and go forward with a plan that would be mindful of the various activities at SPR. Commissioner Hannon stated it would be a good plan if forming this task force shows Town Council there is forward movement and could possibly protect the budget for SPR. Chair Zwiener stated he would like the Commission to discuss the concept and who should be on the project team, and bring their suggestions forward to the next HPC meeting for action. Commissioner McClung stated he would encourage use of the SPR Master Plan that is already in place as the foundation for further discussion. Chair Zwiener stated he would be in favor in retaining the language of the Master Plan, but there is a lot this team would be doing that is not covered in the Master Plan. Mr. Popelka stated to keep Council Member Latas informed, but the Commission does not need Council approval to set up this task advisory group. Chair Zwiener asked Mr. Adler about his thoughts. Mr. Adler stated that as a courtesy, the Town Council should be advised if Staff is going to have representation on the task force. Chair Zwiener stated he would like HPC to consider how to move forward on the project team for the next HPC meeting. 6. Commission vacancy. Chair Zwiener stated the vacancy is due to the resignation of Commissioner Spoerl. Vice Chair Nagy would like to see this position kept open. Commissioner Baughman stated the HPC could make a recommendation to the Town Council. 7. Discussion and possible action regarding Staff Report. Mr. Popelka stated he is making adjustments with the P&Z staff in regards to p work load. Mr. Popelka will be assigning Karen Berchtold, Acting Principal p Planner, as the official liaison for HPC on a temporary basis until things are settled with thep osition of the Planning Director in the P&Z Department. ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: A motion was made by Commissioner Baughman and seconded by Commissioner Hannon to adjourn the HPC meeting at 8:01 p.m. MOTION carried, 6-0. 3 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 11, 2010 TO: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FROM: Bayer Vella, AICP and Karen Berchtold, AICP SUBJECT: Agenda Item #3 - Proposed updates to the Oro V alley Zoning Code Revi sed (OVZCR) Purpose Theur ose of this agenda item is to introduce a sixty percent complete zoning code drafts for two items, and p p garner HPC commentary on them. The first item specifies the zoning functions of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and the specific review process, evaluative criteria, and standards to be utilized when considering site development. The second item is an update of the Cultural Resources section. In fall 2009, the HPC assigned a workgroup to review the drafts. The group, comprised of Pat Spoerl, Dan Zweiner, and Sam McClung, held several meetings with Planning staff and the Environmentally Sensitive lands (ESL) Consultant, David Williams, to review the drafts and provide direction. The drafts were revised based on this input. Staff's goal is to present the drafts to the HPC for discussion before advanced work commences. At this meeting, staff anticipates that the HPC will discuss the drafts and provide general comments. Staff requests that any detailed or"wordsmith" comments be provided writing to Bayer Vella or Karen Berchtold by Wednesday, January 20. After garnering HPC input, the drafts will be revised and forwarded to Pima County, Arizona State Museum, and State Historic Preservation Office staff for comment. The final drafts will be vetted by the HPC workgroup and presented to the full HPC in February. Section 21.9, Historic Preservation Commission This is a new section that describes the HP C's planning and zoning functions. It will be included in Chapter 21 of the OVZCR, "Review and Decision-making bodies." The content was derived by evaluating the General Plan, Town Code, and responsibilities of other Boards/Commissions. The responsibilities of the HPC in the Town and Zoning Codes must be distinct. The focus of this section is to outline only those responsibilities related to planning and zoning matters. Section21.9 describes the planning and zoning functions and responsibilities of Planning &Zoning Commission, Development Review Board, Art Review Commission, and Board of Adjustment in the same manner. Cultural Resources Section of the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance This section represents a significant improvement to the existing zoning code Section 27.2, Cultural Resources Preservation. The existing section describes the steps an applicant must take to identify and evaluate cultural resources on a development site. This new section does the same; however, it includes an enhanced review process, evaluative criteria, a three tiered approach to resource conservation, definitions, and clarifies expectations for preservation and/or mitigation. To facilitate understanding of the developm ent review process, a flow chart entitled "Cultural Resource Review Process" has been developed and will be discussed at the meeting. It is likely the chart would be included in a packet that would be distributed to the applicant, but would not be included in the OV ZCR. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD Page 2 of 2 Action Requested No action is requested. Staff requests that general comments be discussed at the meeting. Detailed or "wordsmith" comments must be submitted to staff in writing by Wednesday, January 20. A final draft will be presented to the HPC in February. Cc: File Cultural Resources Table of Contents 1 . Purpose Bring together and update existing purpose statements for consistency with the General Plan and the HPC. 2. Description Describes the Cultural Resources category of the ESLS. g 3. Applicability �r Specifies what activities these requirements apply to such as building and grading. 4. Conservation Standards Describes the three tiered approach to cultural resource protection. 5. Determination of Significance Provides criteria for determining appropriate level of protection and management for cultural resources. 6. Review Procedures Cultural Resource identification and treatment plan review and approval process is outlined. 7. Development Standards Requirements for discoveries, disturbances, and human remains. 8. Treatment Plan Documentation necessary for specific site mitigation and long term management of cultural resources. Draft 1/4/10 1 CULTURAL RESOURCES This section is intended for insertion in the ESL draft as Section III.C.2.E E. Cultural Resources Category Cultural Resources, as defined by Chapter 31, includes a variety of historic and prehistoric sites, materials and records that the Town's General Plan has identified for protection and conservation. 1. Purpose The purposes of the Cultural Resource Category include: a. Protect and perpetuate the unique character of Oro Valley where cultural resources are of enduring value in advancing education, general welfare, civic pride, and appreciation of the Town's heritage. b. Establish standards for the identification and preservation of significant cultural resources. c. Establish guidelines and specifications for the preservation of identified cultural resources within the Town. d. Prevent or reduce adverse impacts to significant cultural resource sites by employing a range of mitigation treatments. t e. Require the assessment of resources using updated National Register of Historic Places standards and criteria. f. Inclusion of cultural resources in the ESLS provides for the preservation of significant resources and their evaluation and dispensation in the context of other environmentally sensitive features. 2. The Cultural Resources category includes any significant cultural or historic resource. Cultural resources are not included on the ESLS maps in order to protect sensitive sites. Other pertinent, public information on historic and cultural resources is ................... available from the Town. 3. Applicability Compliance with the requirements of this Section applies to all ground-disturbing and development activities including: a. Grading, clearing, grubbing, trenching, b. Subdivision Plat, c. Development Plan, d. Rezoning, PAD Amendment, e. Conditional Use Permit. Draft 1/4/10 2 4. Conservation Standards a. Cultural Resources can occur singly or in combination with other environmentally sensitive resources. Preservation of significant cultural resources is applied through three levels of conservation based on the cultural resources survey and report, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommendations and the approved treatment plan. Three conservation standards are established: (1) Preserved In-Place: significant resources that must be preserved in-place as determined by the approved treatment plan in order to protect the cultural or historic value of the resource. (2) Combination: significant resources that are to be partially preserved in-place and partially mitigated as determined by the approved treatment plan. (3) Mitigation: significant resources that may be completely mitigated as prescribed by the approved treatment plan, allowing reuse of the site. b. Conservation of cultural resources is intended to be integrated with conservation of other environmentally sensitive resources. Conservation must be consistent with sensitivities of other resource categories in the ESLS. Table CR-1 indicates the minimum conservation standards that apply to cultural resources when they occur in combination with other environmentally sensitive lands. Table CR-1 ESL Category Conservation Standards Major Wildlife Linkage 100% Preserved In-Place Critical Resource Area Core Resource Area Preserved In-Place or Combination Multiple Use Management Area .............................. ......................... 5. Determination of Significance Town staff, which may include supplemental archaeological expertise, will use the National Register and local criteria included below to identify significant cultural resources. Cultural resources may be significant on the local, state, or national level. One of three determinations must be made: Not Significant: The resource does not meet the National Register or local criteria. Draft 1/4/10 3 Potentially Significant: The resource has distinct potential to meet National Register or local criteria, or it cannot be determined if the resource meets the criteria. Significant: the resource meets either the National Register or local criteria. a. National Register Criteria The Town utilizes National Register of Historic Places criteria based on the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. These standard criteria are used to evaluate the significance of cultural resources. The significance of cultural resource refers to its ability to meet one or more of the four National Register criteria: Critieria A Association with historic events or activities; or Critieria B Association with an important person in history; or Critieria C Distinctive design or physical character; or Critieria D Potential to provide important information about prehistory or history. b. Local Criteria In addition to National Register criteria, local criteria are used to 'dentif si nificant cultural resources. The gnificance of cultural resources refers to its ability to meet on or more of the local criteria: Community: Contributes to the historic uniqueness and identity of our community, state or nation; (2) Economic: Contributes to the economic, educational or c Cot recreational needs of our community; (3) Environmental: Contributes to the ability to define and protect environmentally sensitive areas; (4) Heritage: Contributes to the religious, mythological, social or other special needs of a discrete population within or outside of our community; (5) Historic Integrity: Authenticity is evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that are preserved from its original state; Draft 1/4/10 4 (6) Landmark: Has the potential to be placed on the National Register of Historic Places; (7) Prehistoric Integrity: The site is preserved in an undisturbed or minimally disturbed context; (8) Scientific: The site is preserved in a condition in which valid and reliable scientific observations can be made; (9) Predominance: Occurs with a high frequency, density, ....................... or diversity. 6. Review Procedures a. An archaeological records check shall be performed in conjunction with an application for permit or other development approval. b. A report meeting the requirements of Section d, below, shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist if: (1) Records indicate no cultural resource surveys of the subject property have been completed, or (2) Surveys of the property are more than 10 years old or, (3) The existing survey and report lack sufficient information to determine significance in accordance with Section III.C.2.E.5, or (4) The Arizona State Museum recommends an updated survey. c. The Planning and Zoning Director has the authority to request a new or updated report. d. The report shall include, at a minimum, the following: (1) An inventory of the site, (2) Recommendations for: i. Inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places, ii. Inclusion on the Oro Valley Register of Historic Places, iii. Further fieldwork or surveys, and (3) Treatment Plan in accordance with Section .C.2.E.10. e. Town staff shall use the survey and report, and the criteria for significance in this Section to identify significant cultural resources. f. At the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Director, a qualified archaeologist may be retained by the Town to Draft 1/4/10 5 review the cultural resources report and make a recommendation, based on the criteria contained in this Section, regarding cultural resource significance. The Town's expense of a qualified archaeologist shall be paid by the applicant. g. If determined significant, or potentially significant, the survey and report shall be forwarded to SHPO for review and comments. SHPO comments will be evaluated by staff to determine the need for refinements or amendments to the report and review by the HPC. h. The treatment plan, prepared in accordance with Section 8, below, for significant or potentially significant cultural resources must be approved by the HPC. i. The determination of significance can be appealed to the Historic Preservation Commission. Upon receipt of written request for appeal by the applicant, the HPC shall act within 45 days to confirm or reverse the staff determination. The determination of the HPC is final. j. Once the Town has determined that there are no significant cultural resources on the site, or a treatment plan has been approVed, cultural resource clearance is obtained. Cultural resource clearance from the Town is required prior to the issuance of any permits for ground disturbing activity or development as listed in Section III.C.2.E.3, licability43T\\ . :.:: ::: Boa. ..,♦...::.'::..:';.. __47. Development Standards a. Disturbance. No physical disturbance (including artifact collection or excavation) of significant or potentially significant cultural resource sites is permitted unless specifically indicated in the approved treatment plan. Cultural resources identified for in-place preservation will be protected during development activities. b. Discoveries. Unrecorded cultural resource sites unearthed during construction must be recorded and documented by a professional archaeologist. If any cultural resources are encountered during the grading/excavating process, all works shall cease in the vicinity of the resources and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to assess the significance of the resources and prepare recommendations in accordance with the criteria in Section III.C.2.E.5, Determination of Draft 1/4/10 6 Significance. The treatment plan shall be approved in accordance with Section III.C.2.E.6, Review Procedures. Information on the location and nature of cultural resources will be restricted except as necessary for avoidance and protection. c. Off-site Development and Ancillary Construction. Utility trenches, water and sewage treatment and distribution facilities, roads, and similar infrastructure construction projects must meet the requirements of this ..::..:::..... Section. d. Treatment of Human Remains. If human remains are known to exist on the site or are discovered in the course of construction, an agreement for the treatment of the human remains shall be developed with the Arizona State Museum (ASM) and appropriate cultural groups pursuant to ARS Section41.844 and ARS Section 41-865. This agreement shall be established prior to archaeological investigation. The property owner must comply with these state laws, even if a treatment plan has been approved. e. Excavations on Public Property. No individual shall be allowed to use a probe, metal detector, or any other device to search or excavate:for artifacts on public property, nor can any individual remove artifacts from public property without the written permission of the Town. Furthermore, no disturbance or construction activities shall be authorized within the properties belonging to the Town, including public streets and rights-of-way, without a Town permit and without such cultural resource compliance as required by this Section. Treatment Plan a. Required treatment plans must be prepared by a qualified archaeologist. b. The treatment plan must detail all aspects of protection, a ° x ? mitigation and long-term management of the identified cultural resources. c. Phased Developments: Phased developments must submit a treatment plan for the entire development. Imple- mentation of the approved treatment plan may occur incrementally for each phase that contains cultural resources. In the event that a cultural resource site spans more than one phase, implementation must include all phases that contain the site. Draft 1/4/10 7 d. A credit for required Natural Open Space may be approved in accordance with the Treatment Plan for protection of cultural resources in-place. (1) The area to be preserved in perpetuity shall be accurately indicated in the Treatment Plan prior to its approval. (2) An open space credit of one square foot for each square foot of cultural resource site preserved in-place may be approved. (3) Only areas within the cultural resource site, as identified in the treatment plan are eligible for the open space credit. i�'i":Ad2t2a4»'sM�.. :Si v'...„. '�e�.^4�FAtail+`k:3:i2e1i:Y.+>.^i+fPx :liK�i1C.1T'�':Ki.�•T�C2u2>.'oia •..... :.. Ki+�Y.7iL•X u: .?i�:u:>•.•^c ccs+: :::.ro: 1....-7,',7, ,":„„„,,S u,-...::ice:• is Y3:. Draft 1/4/10 8 Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised New Section Section 21.9 Historic Preservation Commission A. Scope In accordance with the General Plan Cultural and Historic Resources Element, the Historic Preservation Commission is intended to facilitate the protection and preservation of cultural resources in the Oro Valley community. The Commission's work shall include identification, review and approval of proposed treatments and protections for significant cultural resources. B. Powers and Duties (Town Code duties removed) 1. Maintain and interpret criteria and standards for the identification of significant cultural and historic resources as defined in Chapter 31. Require the assessment of resources using updated National Register of Historic Places standards and criteria. 2. Determine the significance of cultural resources. 3. Recommend guidelines and specifications for the preservation of identified cultural resources within the Town. 4. Function as the review and approval body for proposed cultural resource treatment plans in accordance with the ESLS. 5. Ensure the preservation of significant cultural resources whenever possible. 6. Recommend the establishment and amendment of historic districts to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 7. Work with other Town advisory boards and commissions in the design and use of other areas which include significant cultural resources. C. Transaction of Business 1. The Historic Preservation Commission shall conduct its business in accordance with applicable Town regulations and its rules and procedures as adopted by the Town Council. 2. The Planning and Zoning Director shall be the Secretary of the Historic Preservation Commission. 3. The Historic Preservation Commission Chair, or his/her designee, has the right to appear before the Town Council on items of interest to the Historic Preservation Commission. 1.04.10 1 DRAFT Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised New Section D. Effect of Decisions All Historic Preservation Commission final actions and findings of decisions shall be transmitted to the Town Council regardless of vote. ;r.rY.iJ; ::nw Ow\ " i it "'•:" L \ r )rv. :a £i'3•:£:. "—",:-..--,-'""',.,:s.,-- -,::-7:7— ---`"":",—;;., �r„..---z:......:',‘„,.... .. '',„.;,....:',`,-- '::::=:,X•<u. q:i...£+i:;n—.- :R•?:S£A:::. A3a r<`•w,• ::r~•.'..irre,vr:si•:,<.a.'f•.�A.::^h.:4i:k:ii.. ai•ieti2:.:: :'£R:irrY ..rz:i:. £r4 -5:££.b,...„-a'a :::ii:£ry,+.,£rr:: 9£:r•:% .r3:•'e1iv.. <:::iti5F2•;<::: ':„...,--...:MY,„,., :.:.. . ..�;:;i” ..:aaroe>:: .SA::..:•�r.R a9>.::?^S.:':R:09\t:'., ::>i.N±•...:i}iht Y:a3'•r:33 t kr>•Y4.`..u,C+.•?..<a3i{:?<:..• x eta rr» r £:'::£4r\Mf•....:\r'£..is _'r•K'•.\...0.3•»..332 :x....:. A.::C?..:i3•:9.f1: :Vt::- '.....:\^SrrK `.,•.>iV\, ..£:33`r.:iw.3:.:: ..`k•.:i::::££C:F 3e..>.iii.:tt... ..r`hti:i.+vr'•iei>ir .....•:Vrr Aw...i... •ii\r?,,,, .+:C:v.A.r.. 'h\...:.£Ti••C+.::: 'A..`7T....... .i:.'.3.:£..Ysi:: :. .;:.::..: -,,,9iceo..vr:-..... ::ti i -�... era ie3•a:i>. Aii:......:. �'•ur:x,ia.:yii�£r. ry,......:iv:;::::t3.. L+t:i`.o:.e;:£Si ':4:x£x£tarYi£r ivr• .£r..�:::ih£•. ♦ 'jai:, • • • 1.04.10 2 DRAFT .0 te..) cOakus :3 Cultural Resources Review Process ���1lto3 f / Application for Development Treatment Approval (Permit, Plan Approved Plat, DP, CUP, Rezoning) Records Check HPC Review Treatment Plan No Old Review Survey Survey Process Ends Recent Survey and Report Treatment Plan Potential Site Refinement Determined Not Significa t No Resource Review Process Ends Resources Present SHPO Review Treatment Plan Refinement Significant Town Staff& Potentially Archaeologist g � Significant Evaluation & Determination of Significance Review Process Not Significant Ends Draft 1/4/10 Sc�s-rr iL5i E,nAtL rna,y1 Li 6 ► 1��li o WORK PLAN FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE STEAM PUMP RANCH, AZ BB:9:75 (ASM), ORO VALLEY, PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY AT THE STEAM PUMP The Town of Oro Valley is preparing to reconstruct the historic Steam Pump/Blacksmith Shop at the Steam Pump Ranch, located along the north side of Oracle Road. The adobe brick building was apparently constructed in the 1870s and initially housed a large steam- powered water pump. A later wood frame addition was the location of a blacksmith shop. Portions of the building are preserved,primarily three of the adobe walls of the steam pump building. Other portions survive as archaeological features. Prior to the reconstruction activities, Desert Archaeology, Inc., will perform archaeological data recovery to collect information about the building, locate adjacent features, and recover a sample of artifacts associated with the building's use. As part of this work, a backhoe will be used to grade the area around the building to improve drainage, directing water away from the foundations. This work plan presents a detailed description of the planned work. Desert Archaeology has previously surveyed the property and prepared a detailed history of the ranch (Thiel 2007). PROJECT AREA LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The project areas are located in Pima County in the northeast quarter of Section 7,Township 12 South, Range 14 East on the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quad Oro Valley, Ariz. (AZ BB:9 [NW]) (Figure 1). Specifically, the project area is located along the northern side of North Oracle Road,east of Lambert Lane,in Oro Valley. Area of Potential Effects (APE) refers to the "geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties,if any such properties exist" (36 CFR 800.16[d]).The APE for this project includes the footprint of the project area. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROJECT AREA The project area is located immediately adjacent, to the south, of the channeled Canada del Oro wash. This major tributary of the Santa Cruz River receives runoff from the nearby Santa Catalina Mountains. Natural vegetation along the floodplain adjacent to the Canada del Oro within the vicinity of the project area, includes mesquite groves and isolated cactuses. The actual Steam Pump Ranch property has been extensively modified by its historic and modern use. The modern vegetation includes cottonwood, palm, pecan, and eucalyptus trees;along with large areas of irrigated lawn with scattered bushes and plantings. a Work Plan for Archaeological Data Recovery at the Steam Pump Ranch, Page 5 Oro Valley,Pima County,Arizona 4 1"m l7 .. .. ..... ....:ai .. ... ....�. } 2763i • ;.._..,.:,. . w,.,, is+ y Y f 1• > . • is •E t+� • • {. •• 2713 1 ,. ,., . fr"''''''"1.,......,,,,..41....,,,,,,,...........,,,,,,,-..,.. ...,,,,,,,,................,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,....,,,,, i . F�7t • 3 ' • • P.... ' # - l LO r ,,, r ::........-ww.,ww,n•�.�NAawiNtiM::4n i,vy•Y.:'.*7....7.„wN;7,tN!i<,Kh • f � . . .vAL hlviir ....: -�� xY. F1: .a >.w.•4 ), i . � ' � 5V,�/ : • i. 4 • . • r••'.. , I /s t: . • i 33 •-• ..k•i.., ,., C.,. /'' :. .. ):,,-.'', ' '''.. •••'`'',,,':''' -"'"''''''''''.-"." '' — ' r--,.,„.......... ,::, ,,.:::::...----:-.----,,,-....---1-""Nf'.- ""..-7-:-...r.'7.- • -We'il 0 ,`,: ` .?..4- , •'• $ : " :Pro ect Area <- ... : c>,. '.: • Ira ,f f "i •• 'i..r,ii:..,i;�.,.wr..r;�.w.«.....«......:.:::....:.:::.:.. ..�.,:.. .:�'.. :.:..: w,d:.f .,.. -4.....,.,.............is«...:.r..... ..•,.......,..t..,.,.• • - 'i•h :. ,...ss' t 1.M+6•iY::. -- ��.s�i�M.w::t,Irnac�t76!;..n. < ,'• s r •.w,w..A `I 0 i,,''400,,,,,,..01;0*::..;.:. .'''s.'' :.••••al.....s . . ' i • . . '''''' . ... .' •• .. . 0 3583840 m N .. - • . f ` :o 4 ,:. • ar.,#, .J\.:v \ \. `,4,. \s<. - 0. '� `r •'4% \ 1 •y_. J ,. ` ''''.%'',..„,'. \ xr ..�:.. ....,x ..�..,:::. ..,,.i,«,ib*.iKh..,:•.r:.♦..o..•.a,dc...:::..•...•..�•....�e.:.. .•,�....w. '... y'�; ` i' e,, • f. t "�., ,v .h' �..:. .... : ` it i • • Steam Pump Ranch Oro Valley,Pimp County,AZ Project Overview I 1 ;moils USGSi.5•<-nairiuti''1`c.•►ptigraPili Quad •;-„,..! -- l'is't Or1 N.Al.. !,•••' ....... ...1.,___,„....,......_ t.'"t..t 1'rti cti on Zone 12 NA fl21t3 () 2000 Figure 1. Reproduction of USGS 7.5-minute topographic quad Oro Valley,Ariz.(AZ BB:9[NW]),showing location of project area. Work Plan for Archaeological Data Recovery at the Steam Pump Ranch, Page 6 Oro Valley,Pima Countly,Arizona The elevation of the project area averages approximately 2,580 to 2,950 ft above sea level, sloping slightly from the northeast to the southwest. THE STEAM PUMP/BLACKSMITH SHOP In 1874, George Pusch came to Arizona, driving a 14-mule team. He lived in Phoenix and Prescott for awhile before moving to Tucson. Pusch formed a partnership with John Zellweger, who had also moved to Tucson, and they opened a butcher shop together in the mid 1870s, realizing they could make more money by selling the meat from their cattle than by merely selling their cattle to others. Pusch purchased the Canada del Oro Ranch with Zellweger and they marked their cattle with the PZ brand. The purchase of a steam pump led to the renaming of the Steam Pump Ranch. It is likely that the adobe portion of the Steam Pump building was constructed in the 1870s to provide protection to the steam pump the two men brought overland to the ranch. Unfortunately, records do not provide an exact date of construction. The existing building had a rock foundation with tall adobe walls. The building had a corrugated metal roof supported by metal trusses. The roof collapsed during a storm in 2003 and has been dismantled. At some time the original. floor inside the pump room was covered with a poured concrete floor. A blacksmith shop was built along the south side of the building. Its date of construction is not known, although it is visible as a wood frame addition in photographs from the 1920s. The southern wall was partially made from adobe bricks. This portion of the building also had a corrugated metal roof supported by wood trusses. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Archaeological excavation of the Steam Pump/Blacksmith Shop is expected to provide answers to a number of questions relating to the construction and use of the building. Each is detailed below. Question 1). How was the building constructed? How did it change through time? An examination of the standing portions of the building and sections of the foundation indicate that a variety of materials (stone, mortar, adobe brick, wood, corrugated metal, concrete, and tamped earth) were used to construct the building. Excavation of units along the foundations of the building will allow for a better understanding of how the building was constructed and how it was modified through time. Of special interest is an examination of how the walls of the Steam Pump room and Blacksmith Shop abut each other. Question 2). What was the layout of the Blacksmith Shop? The Blacksmith Shop has a partially visible tamped earth floor. A rectangular wooden post protrudes from the floor and is likely a mount for a piece of equipment. Clearing the interior of the room through careful hand-scraping with shovel and trowels will expose other internal features and allow 4 Work Plan for Archaeological Data Recovery at the Steam Pump Ranch, Page 7 Oro Valley,Pima County,Arizona for a better understanding of the placement of equipment such as the anvil, the hearth, equipment stands, and cooling barrels. Only one other Territorial era blacksmith shop has been explored in Arizona,the Moss Shop in downtown Phoenix (Thiel 1998. Question 3). What was the internal layout of the Steam Pump room? The Steam Pump room is currently covered with a poured-in-place concrete slab.This slab will be removed as part of the reconstruction work. Archaeologists will clear the interior of the room beneath the slab to locate earlier floor surfaces and to determine whether internal features, such as equipment mounts,were present within the room. Question 4). What activities took place around the Steam Pump/Blacksmith Shop? Reconstruction plans call for the grading of the area around the building to direct water away from the structure. It is uncertain whether there were features associated with the building. A number of large rocks are visible on the eastern side of the building, perhaps representing the location of a building or equipment. Units excavated by hand will recover a sample of artifacts associated with the building. Careful stripping and contouring of the existing ground surface will expose other artifacts and may locate adjacent features, which will then be documented by archaeologists. WORK PLAN Archaeological fieldwork will be undertaken to answer each of the research questions (Figure 2). A permit for archaeological fieldwork and a collections accession number will be obtained from the Arizona State Museum. All project forms, photographs, and artifacts will be submitted to the Arizona State Museum for curation. All hand excavated units would be dug in either stratigraphic levels, if possible, or in 20 cm arbitrary levels. Standardized forms will be completed for each level. Profile drawings will be made of at least one wall for each excavation unit. All hand-excavated soil will be screened through 1/4-inch mesh and the artifacts collected for processing in Desert Archaeology's laboratory. Task 1). Ten 2-m by 1-m excavation units will be hand excavated around the exterior foundation of the building. Two units will be placed along each wall and a single unit will be placed along the eastern side at the juncture of the Steam Pump room and the Blacksmith Shop. A tenth unit will be arbitrarily placed to further document any area of particular interest. The exterior of the building foundation is about 50 m and, as planned, a total of 20 m would be hand excavated down to the base of the foundation. The exposed foundations will be documented through detailed profile drawings, photographs, and descriptive forms. A total of 20 person days will be expended on this task. Task 2). The floor of the Blacksmith Shop area,which measures roughly 11.8 rn by 5.8 m (39 ft by 19 ft), will be hand scraped using a flat-nosed shovel and trowels, down to the hard- packed floor surface. All floor features will be documented through forms, photographs, and maps. A total of four person days will be expended on this task. Work Plan for Archaeological Data Recovery at the Steam Pump Ranch, Page 8 Oro Valley,Pima County,Arizona .� ,.. t / / --... ___....,,,,..L.::-.....2„, 4 --- ,,,---,.,, --,\ i —,,..... ic ,,/ \ i ',� / l / • • 1 •\ 1.,,:,j"- ''''N) /le , 1i I / 255. .8 • �:5 2585.7 f" _ I / • \ (-\ V /7-'''''...'.." .' {Bili I ) LANE :r!. . ,7:: ,J' \\\ ,., \` \ "�" 'lir?' s !\ '\\ ,,S/' \ ' \ Z-'. - div-'''''''4'4,% \ i \ --A \ \ f ' • ••••••- i i ', N ,••"... f \ ,. ',,, \.,,,,,-7-, 41..: a e.\\.1 rv--. \\--NN.........../;/ ---.) \ IP, .-S...:—: :,." 1 C\ / V,>,. ----N vi HIGHEST PRIORITY -�., \::C OS,,,,./>/ ``~- (----._ ' \\ .. / \ \\\\ "/ ' ` \\. �'~-� STING SECURITY FENCE \ ,\''...,'"/, ,7 / i i f .{ EX \; : : . / ''. \ , 4 ,! 1/ ./ / / / �'OE PUMP HSE /. // ' *------ ",-,-,--./.; ..1. / ,/./. / ...- / sz- ...,N,..:s,--.2/ .,:s ..,,,-" 7 ,/,./ ./ 25,075_, -,. ,;)/..,1 . I ,,,././///(7/,.... // . ,../// / /2583.5 ------------ \ 2582?—., , ,.,y , f, / . if � r ' 1 _\ /r` ,,,,"/„,,, ,/ \ ,' ,. // _/ /// ./ //',,,,,,,--/- .....:: -------,4 ./ .<7. / i / / / - - - . _ . ., Steam Pump Ranch Key Oro Valley,Pima County,AZ MIII Excavation Unit Task a Meters AZ 1313:9:75(ASM) ll FN Flour Clearing Tasks 2 and 3 Q 15 Steam Pump/Blacksmith iti rho BuildinI Excavation Unit Task 4 Feet F 0 60 Figure 2. Work plan for the Steam Pump/Blacksmith Shop building. Task 3). The floor of the Steam Pump room measures about 7.4 m by 7.3 m (24 ft by 24 ft). After the removal of the concrete slab, the area will be stripped using a flat-nosed shovel and trowels. All soil will be screened through 1/4-inch mesh. Archaeologists will be searching for any original dirt floors and internal features. Four person days are expected to be sufficient for this task. Work Plan for Archaeological Data Recovery at the Steam Pump Ranch, Page 9 Oro Valley,Pima County,Arizona Task 4). One 2-m by 2-m unit will be placed over the rock area adjacent to the Blacksmith Shop to determine whether this is a floor or equipment mount area. Five additional 2-m by 1-m areas will be hand excavated in the area around the building to recover a sample of artifacts and examine the external area for features. Ten person days will be expended for this task. Following completion of the hand units, a backhoe equipped with a seven-ft-wide scraping blade will strip the area around the structure to the planned construction grade. This work will be supervised by archaeologists who will collect artifacts and document any exposed features. It is expected that two backhoe days and four person days will be expended in this effort. Following completion of fieldwork all artifacts will be processed in Desert Archaeology's laboratory. Items will be analyzed and prepared for curation at the Arizona State Museum. A report describing the results of fieldwork and artifact analyses will be prepared and submitted to Poster/Frost for review within four months following completion of fieldwork. REFERENCES CITED Thiel,J.Homer 1998 Phoenix's Hidden Histone:Archaeological Investigations at Blocks 72 and 73.Anthropological Papers No. 26. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson. Anthropological Papers No. 7. Pueblo Grande Museum,Phoenix. 2007 Cultural Resources Survey of The Steam Pump Ranch, Oro Valley, Pima Counhj, Arizona. Project Report No. 07-121. Desert Archaeology,Inc.,Tucson. Proposed Steam Pump Ranch Recovery and Preservation Task Force A `t Title Steam Pump Ranch Master Plan Project Team Steam Pump Ranch Recovery and Preservation Task Force Steam Pump Ranch Recovery and Preservation Advisory Committee Potential Membership 1. Oro Valley Historic Preservation Commission Chairman 2. Oro Valley Historic Preservation Commission Staff Liaison 3. Oro Valley Special Projects Coordinator 4. Representative from the Oro Valley Planning and Zoning Commission 5. Representative from the Oro Valley Parks and Recreation Department 6. Oro Valley Communications Administrator 7. Pima County Cultural Resources Manager 8. Project Consultant 9. Archaeological Consultant 10. Citizen At Large Potential Duties 1. Recommend and monitor budget priorities. 2. Recommend and monitor recovery and preservation plan in accordance with National Register and State Historic Preservation Office standards as well as the Pima County Easement and Intergovernmental Agreement. 3. Recommend and monitor compliance with (proposed) Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance and all other requirements under town code. 4. Make recommendations on and monitor treatment proposals for buildings,grounds, documents and photographs. 5. Monitor activities for Areas of Potential Effect (APE). 6. Recommend proposals for community outreach including the development of partnerships with outside parties. 7. Monitor activities on the site in accordance with the Steam Pump Ranch Visitors and Access Protocol. 8. Liaison with town groups planning events for Steam Pump Ranch. 9. Monitor and re-evaluate contracts and change orders. A statement of the powers and duties should also be made including who recommendations should be forwarded to. 7 t I\ILL...:,40,00 .526 - ' - ' Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010IT ;` ° Page 1 of 2 / /i-/0 () 1 () MST( )RIIRI S1.v1 \ .A 1: 1R.) \ 1'+\ I 1'NLRS.l IP UU \ I E : l 1:+ \ ( E c Preservati F . s - ► her Ele ' .yr �+k .`�++r+ .;#\,+'�'` �''rs , �} }rA, a �4 r 4 ,,,. , ,,, , ,„ . ,,,, A -.,„,,„ .,,,,, _q -_-:- - -' it,,,,tigi _ ..... . .' -ip +.rte Irtio . . _ ,M. , , -: ttaff�yjj� . w t, ,,,,,,,_,,,,:,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,i:,,,., �y y�`qk `. AZ a `M �` i� 'R �u# i. , i '? Rai e�} a . `+' s'M Hone Agenda Speakers Partners Awards Registration Conference Facility Accommodations FAQs Contact Links Presented By Featured Partners asadalt `� ...ti iii1 ,,,, ,44.,.q-t. - ---—Pi**.1.-',„; 10111411/611111660.411AI ''' ' - '_ n . 0 tit , i_ fJ, N\ A mexVIRvAt €x l ARIZONA 1.• HISTORICAL ta �te „ .SOCIETY l':-, .� { Preget,w4111444 Ai;t t#isjhi I kttrvatiu:A Join Our Mailing List """ • J Email: ._.__.. _.. . '4'. ,6,„ i: - Ptiv acv bv SafeSubscribe s'''' iseamismai -i-y ,. f;. r For Email Marketing you can trust 2010 HPPC Poster Dear Fellow Preservationist: The Arizona Preservation Foundation, Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, Arizona Department of Commercea€TMs Main Street Program, and the City of Flagstaff invite you to join them at the 8th Annual Historic Preservation Partnership I)evert Archaeology,Inc. Conference. This years€TMs conference, a€[-]Preservation at a Higher Elevation,a€ is being held in Flagstaff, May 13th-14th, 2010. The goal of the Conference is to bring together preservationists from around the state to exchange ideas and success stories, to share perspectives and solutions to preservation issues and to foster .'`,.\-` ' ''‘-,/, cooperation between the diverse Arizona preservation communities. '. With the advent of new construction materials, building technologies and , archaeological discoveries, the preservation community needs to change with the times and find new ways to integrate the old with the new. It is this integration that E ,,IR FO constantly transforms the interpretation of the Standards and sets new policies for working in todaya€TMs changing world. Through community outreach and 1)I1sERYI participation with preservation partners, everyone can have an equal voice in setting ARCHAEOLOGY the standards for the future of preservation. a nonprofit corporation The Preservation Awards Luncheon will be the focal event of the Conference. The 28th Annual Governors€TMs Heritage Preservation Honor Awards are presented at the luncheon. These awards, presented by the State Historic Preservation Office and the Arizona Preservation Foundation, recognize people, organizations, and projects NATIONAL that represent outstanding achievements in preserving Arizonas€TMs prehistoric and TRUST historic resources. The Governors€TMs Awards in Public Archaeology are also FOR presented at the luncheon. These awards, selected by the Governors€TMs HISTORIC Archaeology Advisory Commission, recognize excellence in archaeological PRESERVATION' awareness, conservation and education. The awards make the conference more than a venue to learn, debate and network, but also a celebration of outstanding historic preservation efforts and achievements. With the approach of the States€TMs Centennial in 2012, the need to reflect on our collective past and plan for the future is apparent. I hope that you can join us to address specific historic preservation issues that affect our fragile resources, as well http://vvww.azpreservation.com/ 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page 2 of 2 as the future preservation of Arizonas€TMs unique heritage. 1".A..-AlitSincerely,TalWo � :: X94 1James Garrison cIMISIICAI MARCEL INC, mow Arizona State Historic Preservation Officer f.k ut int RI t til '41A A(t;*MINI 101117 111111 1111161 111111 Kim -Hors and Associates, Inc. jpivrammdmini Agenda Speakers Conference Facility Partners Awards Registration Accommodations FAQs Contact Links EiG1411 Site developed and maintained by: http://www.azpreservation.com/ 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page 1 of 5 2010 1 [URIC PREER\I -A iIO P CONFERF.NLE14-1 • t, Preservat 6 n • { er4 16. '(''�` w' m Flagttaft*,AZ' Aita tY e .i, Home Agenda Speakers Partners Awards Registration Conference Facility Accommodations FAQs Contact Links 2010 Conference Session Descriptions (Subject to change without notice) Day One: (Wednesday) 1:00pm—5:00pm: Early Sessions and Workshops(TBA) Day Two: (Thursday) 8:00am—9:30am: Continental Breakfast at conference venue 9:30am—10:45am: General Session/Introduction by SHPO 10:45am—11:00am: Morning Coffee Break 11:00am—12:00pm: Breakout Sessions 12:15pm—1:00pm: Lunch 1:00pm—2:30pm: Breakout Sessions 2:30pm—2:45pm: Afternoon Coffee Break 2:45pm—4:30pm: Breakout Sessions 4:30pm—5:00pm: At leisure 5:00pm—5:30pm: Depart for Off-Site Welcome/Networking Reception(via Motorcoaches) 5:30pm—7:30pm: Informal Networking Welcome Reception 7:30pm—8:30pm: Motorcoaches return to conference venue Day Three: (Friday) 7:00am—8:00am: Continental Breakfast at conference venue 8:00am—9:30am: Keynote/General Session 9:45am— 10:45am: Breakout Sessions 10:45am—11:00am: Morning Coffee Break 11:00am—12:00pm: Breakout Sessions 12:15pm—2:00pm: Governor's Awards Luncheon 2:30pm—3:45pm: Breakout Sessions 3:45pm—4:00pm: Afternoon Coffee Break 4:00pm—5:00pm: Breakout Sessions 5:00pm—5:30pm: Depart for Off-Site Networking Reception 5:30pm—6:30pm: Informal Networking Reception 7:30pm—9:30pm: Dinner on an independent basis in Historic Downtown Flagstaff Day Four: (Saturday) Optional morning tours of Flagstaff and surrounding areas. Descriptions of available tours may be found on the Registration Page of the conference website. Registration and payment to be collected on the conference website. www.az.p rese rvati on,;co m Confirmed Sessions List General Interest Sessions: Section 106 Training-Ms. Charlene Vaughn of the Advisory Council for Historic Presentation will lead a workshop on the basics of Section 106. http://www.azpreservation.comlagenda.aspx 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page 2 of 5 Utilizing Google Map Layers-The layers feature in Google Maps is a powerful tool that is changing the way data is shared. Learn how to use layers in this interactive workshop by Center for Desert Archaeology's Doug Gann (must bring own laptop and registration is limited). How to Start a Merchant Association-Merchant associations can be a powerful tool for neighborhood revitalization. Join Locals First Arizona board member and former Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation President Phil Allsop for a lively discussion on what neighborhood merchants can do by working together. Historic Façade Grant Programs-Façade grant programs help businesses and commercial property owners improve their building's exterior appearance increasing their attractiveness to new customers and contributing a positive influence toward revitalization of their respective areas. Jonathan Mabry of the City of Tucson and Ruth Clark of the City of Avondalewill discuss their community's respective programs. Tucson's Downtown Master Plans, 1932-2009-Tucson architect Bill Mackey recently exhibited over 100 master plans for downtown Tucson culled from government archives, libraries, and the collections of historians and architects. Join Mackey as he discusses the lessons learned from looking at 77 years of one community's plans. The Future of Arizona State Parks-A recent study by a task force appointed by the Governor concluded thatArizona's state park system is unsustainable and without doing something Arizona will become the only state in the union to not have state parks. This session will explore the challenges Arizona State Parks faces as well as learn that ways it could overcome them in this timely session, Preservation of the Livermore/Art Barn- In this panel discussion presenters will provide their unique perspectives on the efforts to preserve the Livermore/art barn. How is it that a very old barn, possibly one of the oldest in the state, escaped notice until it was threatened with demolition?Topics will include: the history of the barn and what it took to uncover that history, how the barn's story was communicated to the public, efforts to save the barn, and what is the current status of the preservation effort. Prop 207 Update- Planners from around the state discuss the continuing impact of Prop 207 on planning,zoning, and land use in their communities. Featuring Karl Eberhard of City of Flagstaff, Jonathan Mabry of City of Tucson, Kathy Levin of the City of Sedona, and Hansen from City of Tempe. From No Place to Some Place: New Ideas for Old Strip Malls and Convenience Stores-Arizona's built environment is covered with ubiquitous strip malls and convenience stores. Many are aging and unattractive and have become symbols of neighborhoods in decline. Tucson architect Bill Mackey will discuss his humorous`Field Guide to Tucson Convenience Stores. Paho Mann will show his photo project`Re-inhabited Circle Ks'where he shows examples of adaptively reused Circle Ks from Arizona and New Mexico. UCLA doctoral student Ava Blomberg will discuss her ideas for utilizing strip malls as community owned retail centers where proceeds are reinvested into the community. Public Dialogue as Public Participation for Historic Preservation Planning-Dr. Anita Fonte of Community Renaissance will talk about how public participation plays a role in community planning. Public participation engages the public in deep structure conversations where community values are embedded in public dialogue. Digging deeper into where community values are generated require skills beyond surveys and meeting"feedback sessions." This session will explore the range of skills necessary for effective public dialogue as public participation and will brainstorm opportunities for its use in historic preservation. Along the California Trail-An ancient set of Indian paths and the natural flow of the Gila River created a major artery for travel through pioneer Arizona. The Gila provided a ready route for the earliest traders, including Toltecs of Mexico, who traded with the Mogollon,Anasazi and Hohokam. The intrepid Padre Francisco Garces, performed missionary work during six excursions along the trail.As well, Bautista de Anza and Marcos de Niza passed by. Various U.S. surveying expeditions, immigrants—such as the ill-fated Oatman family—and seekers of the California gold fields join the list. The journals, stories, songs and art that came from these travels are rich and revealing of our state's pioneers. Using visuals, live music and recitation, Dr. Jay Cravath shares the diverse history. Archaeological Sessions: The Contributions of Avocational Archaeologists to Historic Preservation (2 hours) Moderator: David R. Wilcox and Peter J. Pilles, Jr. For many decades avocational archaeologists have made fundamental contributions to historic preservation in Arizona. Organized into the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society (founded in 1916) and the many chapters of the Arizona Archaeological Society (founded in the 1960s), these citizens with a passion for archaeology have contributed innumerable hours supporting the activities of professional archaeologists as well as conducting their own research programs. The papers in this symposium celebrate the contributions of the latter kind of initiatives carried out over the last decade http://www.azpreservation.com/agenda.aspx 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page 3 of 5 or more in West-Central and Northern Arizona. Documenting Hilltop Site in West-Central Arizona from an Airplane By Joseph Vogel Full Coverage Archaeological Survey in West Central Arizona By Jerome Ehrhardt Ceramic Study Of The Sycamore Canyon/Hackbery Basin Region Of West-Central Arizona By Jim Graceffa The Deadman's Wash Frontier Zone By Bern Carey Archaeo-Astronomy Survey of the Middle Verde Valley By Ken Zoll Aboriginal Trails in West Central Arizona By Jerome Ehrhardt Preservation Challenges in Grand Canyon National Park Moderator: Jen Dierker, Grand Canyon National Park Grand Canyon has several active preservation and rehabilitation projects in the park each with its own unique challenges. Pervasive erosion and visitation threaten the integrity of archeological sites and in some instances preservation in situ is not an option. Recent excavations along the river corridor have provided NPS an opportunity to collaborate with other resource specialists on stabilization techniques. Alluvial terraces subject to runoff erosion have in some cases exposed additional cultural materials; erosion control using stones and brush have successfully reduced additional erosion. Sites that have been excavated and stabilized require special monitoring and preservation maintenance to mitigate impacts from weathering and visitor-related uses. Ruins stabilization balances the need to provide public education with the NPS mission of resource preservation. Archeologists, biologists, and geomorphologists are pooling their expertise and present low impact preservation techniques currently on-going in Grand Canyon National Park. Restoring Excavated Sites in Grand Canyon: The Challenges of Landscaping in the Desert Kassy Theobald (Grand Canyon National Park) Small Scale Erosion Control as a Preservation Method Christopher Tressler(Utah State University) and Jen Dierker(Grand Canyon National Park) Preservation of Ancient Architecture: Challenges and Successes Ian Hough, (rand Canyon National Park) New Strategies in Federal Cultural Resource Management Moderator: Jeremy Haines, Coconino National Forest Federal archeologists are typically charged with managing cultural resources across broad land bases that often contain thousands of sites across hundreds of thousands of acres. Recent increases in information technology, and data management requirements, as well as changes in land management policies and strategies have created additional challenges. This brief session will touch upon ways that federal archaeologists have adapted to this complexity to better identify, protect, and manage cultural resources. `Rooms with a View' —The Forest Service Cabin Rental Program By Mike Lyndon (Kaibab National Forest) and Kathy Makansi (Coronado National Forest) Protecting Cultural Resources from Wildland Fire By Neil Weintraub (Kaibab National Forest) and Ian Huff(Grand Canyon National Park) http://www.azpreservation.comlagenda.aspx 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page Looking Through a Glass Onion— Incorporating Historic Maps into Geographic Information Systems By Jeremy Haines (Coconino National Forest) y Petroglyphs and Politics: Picture Canyon Moderator: Kelley Hays-Gilpin and Evelyn Billo Picture Canyon, a short stretch of the Rio de Flag within Flagstaff city limits, is many things to man people: a archaeological site, the type site for the Northern Sinagua petroglyph etroglyph style, an outdoory classroom for university students, a beautiful place to hike and see wildlife, a damaged wetland on the verge of restoration, an ancestral sacred place, an ethnobotanical wonder, an outlet for city wastewater, a parcel of state land to be sold at auction, aplace to dump trash. Members of the grass- roots community group struggling to protect it the Picture Canyon Working Group are just as diverse. In this session we trace Picture Canyon's progress from "Flagstaff's Canyon of Shame," as it was described in a newspaper article describing illegal dumping there, to a National Register-listed historic property that nonetheless remains in managerial limbo. Why, in spite of community efforts to protect Picture Canyon, does it still endure vandalism and face threats of sale to developers? Petroglyphs and Politics: An Overview of Picture Canyon Preservation Efforts By Evelyn Billo (Rupestrian CyberServices; American Rock Art Research Association) Picture Canyon as an Outdoor Classroom By Kelley Hays-Gilpin (Northern Arizona University; Museum of Northern Arizona) Listing Picture Canyon on the National Register of Historic Places: Reflections on the Nomination Process By Pat Stein (Arizona Preservation Consultants) Historic Cemeteries Moderator: Marlesa A. Gray,( Director, Historic Program Statistical Research, Inc) NPS Parks Flagstaff Area Recording Navajo Homesites Moderator: Ron Maldonado(NNHPD) Hualapai Cultural Atlas GIS Moderator: Loretta Jackson-Kelly(Hualapai Nation Department of Cultural Resources THPO) The Las Capas Project Moderator: William Doelle The Story of a Preservation Success: The Valencia Community of the Tucson Basin Moderator: Linda Mayro(Pima County)and William Doelle(Desert Archaeology, Inc.) Preserving nearly 100 acres of a Hohokam ballcourt community within the city limits of Tucson is an ongoing process. The process made a significant step forward in November 2009, when Pima County used bond funds and Growing Smarter matching funds to purchase 67 acres of State Trust Land. Goals for preservation and interpretation were first laid out in Tucson's Santa Cruz Riverpark master plan written in 1976. Over the ensuing decades, a variety of development projects impinged upon the Valencia Community, which originally stretched nearly the entire two-mile length of an area zoned for an industrial park. Development projects funded numerous phases of research that have yielded major new insights into Tucson's prehistory from roughly 1000 BC to AD 1200. Efforts to achieve preservation by archaeologists, City and County government personnel, and very importantly, representatives of the Tohono O'odham Nation, have gradually brought about a series of preservation successes. In this session, the story of more than three decades of effort is condensed into a one- hour presentation. The community values that make this place important are considered and the practical aspects of lessons that can be applied elsewhere in Arizona are highlighted. http://www.azpreservation.com/agenda.aspx 01/11/2010 Preservation at a Higher Elevation 2010 Page 5 of 5 Arizona Archaeological Council Board session Moderator: Pending. Agenda Speakers Conference Facility Partners Awards Registration Accommodations FAQs Contact Links M04"10 Site developed and maintained by: :' http://www.azpreservation.comlagenda.aspx 01/11/2010