HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix D - Cultural Resources Report❖ APPENDICES ❖
APPENDIX D
Cultural Resources Report
PHASE I
CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY
FOR THE
CITRUS AVENUE CONDOMINIUMS PROJECT
CITY OF FONTANA
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Brett Hamilton, Associate Planner
Community Development
City of Fontana
Community Development Department
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335-3528
Prepared by:
Megan Black Doukakis, M.A.
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA
Rocky Sperling, B.A.
UltraSystems Environmental Inc.
16431 Scientific Way
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 788-4900
June 2, 2022
Key Words: City of Fontana; San Bernardino County; Devore, Calif. USGS Quad.; Tongva/Gabrielino
tribe; Positive Results; Historical Resources
❖ CULTURAL REPORT ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page i
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
PHASE I
CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY
FOR THE
CITRUS AVENUE CONDOMINIUMS PROJECT
CITY OF FONTANA
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
City of Fontana Community Development Division
Attention: Brett Hamilton, Associate Planner
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335-35288
June 2, 2022
Reviewed by:
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA
UltraSystems Environmental Inc.
Date: June 2, 2022
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page ii
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
Area of Potential Effect ...................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Disposition of Data .............................................................................................................................................. 1-2
2.0 SETTINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 Natural Setting ...................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Cultural Setting ..................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.1 Prehistoric Context .............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2.2 Ethnohistoric Context......................................................................................................... 2-2
2.2.3 Historic Context .................................................................................................................... 2-4
3.0 RESEARCH METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Records Search ...................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Field Survey ............................................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.3 Native American Outreach ............................................................................................................... 3-1
4.0 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1 Records Search ...................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Recorded Archaeological Sites ....................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Previous Cultural Resource Investigations ............................................................... 4-1
4.2 Native American Outreach ............................................................................................................... 4-4
4.3 Pedestrian Survey Results ................................................................................................................ 4-5
5.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................. 5-1
5.1 Site Evaluation Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 Potential Effects .................................................................................................................................... 5-1
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 6-1
7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 7-1
TABLES
Table 4.1-1 - Known Cultural Resources Within a Half-Mile Radius of the Project Boundary ... Error!
Bookmark not defined.
Table 4.1-2 - Known Cultural Resource Studies Within a Half-Mile Radius of the Project Boundary
..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4-2
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A Project Maps
Attachment B Personnel Background
Attachment C Native American Heritage Commission Records Search
Attachment D CHRIS Records Search
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page iii
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
❖ INTRODUCTION ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 1-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
This Phase I Cultural Resource Inventory report was prepared by UltraSystems Environmental (UEI)
at the request of Allard Engineering. This study is for the Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project. The
project consists of the proposed development of a 14 building, 68 unit condominium residential
facility. UEI conducted this cultural resources study to evaluate the potential presence of prehistoric
and historic resources within the project boundary.
The project is located in the City of Fontana (see Attachment A, Figure 1 and Figure 2), and is
specifically located at 6697 Citrus Avenue, and can be seen on the Devore, Calif., USGS topographical
quadrangle, Range 05 West, Township 01 North, in the NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 31 (see
Attachment A, Figure 3). The background research and archival study included a one-half mile
buffer surrounding the project site (see Attachment A, Figure 3). The project is located in a
developing area in the north portion of the city with single family residences across Citrus Avenue to
the west, single-family residences to the south and east, and open land to the north with a gasoline
station farther northwest at the corner of Citrus Avenue and Highland Avenue and a new
development going in to the northeast from the edge of the project parcel to Highland Avenue.
The proposed project includes the development of 14 new residential buildings two-stories high for
a total of 68 three-bedroom units. Ten of the buildings would consist of five units each, three
buildings four units each, and one building of six units. The buildings would be situated in two
east/west oriented rows of seven buildings each on either side of a central main driveway. There
will also be utilities improvements, project site amenities and landscaping. The building footprints
will occupy 69,192 square feet of the 201,683 square feet of gross lot area. The total project site size
is approximately 4.6 acres. At present, the project site is vacant.
Area of Potential Effect
The Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the undertaking encompasses the maximum extent of ground
disturbance required by the project design (see Attachment A, Figure 2). The surface area of the
APE is approximately 4.6 acres. All of this area is subject to direct ground disturbances during
construction.
1.2 Methods
A cultural resources records search was completed at the South Central Coastal Information Center
(SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton, which is the local California Historic Resources
Information System (CHRIS) facility. The records search was conducted to identify previously
recorded cultural resources (prehistoric and historic archaeological sites/isolates, historic buildings,
structures, objects, or districts) within the project area and to also determine previous cultural
resource surveys. The project site and a 0.5-mile buffer zone are included in the search radius for
archival studies. These records included a review of previously recorded prehistoric and historic
archaeological resources and a review of listed cultural resource survey reports within that same
geographical area. The cultural resources record search was conducted by SCCIC staff.
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA, who qualifies as a Principal Prehistoric Archaeologist and Historic
Archaeologist per United States Secretary of the Interior Standards (see Attachment B), contacted
❖ INTRODUCTION ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 1-2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and
contact information of local Native American tribes. Megan B. Doukakis, M.A., and Rocky Sperling,
B.A., contributed to this report.
Disposition of Data
This report will be filed with the SCCIC, California State University, Fullerton; the City of Fontana
Planning Department; and UltraSystems Environmental, Inc., Irvine, California. All field notes and
other documentation related to the study will remain on file at the Irvine office of UltraSystems.
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
2.0 SETTINGS
2.1 Natural Setting
The City of Fontana is located in the western portion of the San Bernardino Valley. This is a broad
inland valley defined by the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountain Ranges to the north and is
ringed by the Jurupa Hills, a series of low rocky hills to the south. The region’s environment is
characterized by a temperate Mediterranean climate, with the average maximum temperature in July
reaching 95 degrees Fahrenheit and the average minimum temperature in January at around 46°F.
Rainfall is typically less than 15 inches annually, most of which occurs between November and March.
The project site boundary is underlain by the Young Alluvial Fan Deposits, unit 5 (Qyf5) (Morton and
Matti, 2001) from “the Lytle Creek that emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains to the north.” This
deposit consists of slightly dissected surfaces and stage S7 soils. It is found in the northeast part of
the Devore, Calif. USGS quadrangle between East Kimbark and Ames Canyons and dates to the
Holocene (11,650 years before present [ybp] to the present time) (Morton and Matti, 2001).
2.2 Cultural Setting
2.2.1 Prehistoric Context
The earliest evidence of human occupation in the Inland Empire region (consisting of the
southwestern corner of San Bernardino and western Riverside counties) was discovered below the
surface of an alluvial fan in the northern portion of the Lakeview Mountains, overlooking the
San Jacinto Valley, dating to around 9,500 radiocarbon years (rcy) before present (B.P.) (before
present = A.D. 1950) (Horne and McDougall, 2008). Another prehistoric archaeological site found
near the shoreline of Lake Elsinore, close to the confluence of Temescal Wash and the San Jacinto
River, dates between 8,000 and 9,000 B.P. (Grenda, 1997). Additional sites with isolated Archaic dart
points, bifaces, and other associated flaked stone artifacts are considered to be from the same age
range and have been found in the Cajon Pass area, typically atop knolls with good viewsheds (Basgall
and True, 1985; Goodman, 2002; Goodman and McDonald, 2001; Milburn et al., 2008).
The regional prehistory of Southern California has been characterized by various cultural
chronologies, including those developed by Chartkoff and Chartkoff (1984), Warren (1984), and
others. Specifically, the prehistory of the Inland Empire region has been addressed by O’Connell et al.,
(1974), Keller et al., (1989), Grenda (1993), and Horne and McDougall (2008). Although the
beginning and ending dates of different cultural periods vary, the regional framework can be
generally broken into four primary periods:
• Paleoindian and Lake Mojave (Terminal Pleistocene and Early Holocene) (ca. 11,000 to
6,000 calibrated years [cal] B.C.). This time period is characterized by highly mobile foraging
strategies and a broad spectrum of subsistence pursuits. These earliest expressions of
aboriginal occupation in America were marked by the use of large projectile points (Fluted
and Concave Base Points) that are an element of the Western Clovis expression. Following
the earliest portions of this time span there was a change in climate coincident with the
retreat of glaciers. Large bodies of water existed and lakeside aboriginal adaptations were
common. Large stemmed points (Western Stemmed – Lake Mojave and Silver Lake)
accompanied by a wide variety of formalized stone tools were employed with the aid of atlatls
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
(dart throwers) and are representative of an adaptation that was in part focused on lacustrine
environments.
• Millingstone Horizon (ca. 6000 cal B.C. to cal A.D. 1000), during which time mobile
hunter-gatherers became more sedentary and plant foods and small game animals came into
more use. This prehistoric cultural expression is often characterized by a large number of
millingstones (especially well-made, deep basin metates) and formalized, portable
handstones (manos). Additionally, the cultural assemblage is dominated by an abundance of
scraping tools (including scraper planes and pounding/pulping implements), and only a
slight representation of dart-tipped projectile points (Pinto, Elko and Gypsum types).
• Late Prehistoric Period (ca. cal A.D. 1000 to 1500), during which a more complex social
organization, more diversified subsistence base and an extensive use of the bow and arrow
is evidenced. Small, light arrow points, expedient millingstones and, later, pottery mark this
period along with the full development of regional Native cultures and tribal territories.
• Protohistoric Period (ca. cal A.D. 1500 to 1700s) ushered in long-distance contacts with
Europeans, and thereby led to the Historic Period (ca. cal A.D. 1700 to contemporary times).
Small arrow points are recognized as a hallmark of this time period.
Geospatial analyses of known prehistoric sites in inland Southern California suggest that longer-term
residential settlements of the Native population were more likely to occur in sheltered areas. Such
locations were near the base of hills and/or on elevated terraces, hills, and finger ridges. Further,
these favored locations were near permanent or reliable sources of water. These were areas that
were largely level encampments situated on the unprotected valley floor. The residential sites were
used for resource procurement and travel. The use of such geographical settings is supported by the
ethnographic literature. These reports identify the foothills as preferred areas for settlement (Bean
and Smith, 1978a; 1978b). The project area is situated at the base of the Jurupa Hills, an ideal location
for prehistoric seasonal habitation site.
2.2.2 Ethnohistoric Context
The project lies within the territory of the Gabrielino (Tongva) ethnolinguistic group (Bean and
Smith, 1978a:538), who speak a language classified as a member of the Uto-Aztecan language family.
This language is further defined as an element of the Northern Takic Branch of that linguistic group
(Golla, 2011).
The Tongva, with the Chumash, were considered the most populous, wealthiest, and therefore most
powerful ethnic nationalities in aboriginal Southern California (Bean and Smith, 1978a:538).
Unfortunately, most Tongva cultural practices had declined before systematic ethnographic studies
were instituted. Today, the leading sources on Tongva culture are Bean and Smith (1978a), Johnson
(1962), and McCawley (1996).
According to recent research, Takic groups were not the first inhabitants of the region. Archeologists
suggest that a Takic in-migration may have occurred as early as 2,000 years ago, replacing or
intermarrying with a more ancient indigenous people represented by speakers of a Hokan language
(Howard and Raab, 1993; Porcasi, 1998). By the time of European contact, the Tongva territory
included the southern Channel Islands and the Los Angeles Basin. Their territory reached east into
the present-day San Bernardino-Riverside area, north to Malibu along the Pacific coast, and south to
the San Joaquin Hills in central Orange County.
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Different groups of Tongva adopted several subsistence strategies, based on gathering, hunting, and
fishing. Because of the similarities to other Southern California tribes in economic activities, inland
Tongva groups' industrial arts, exemplified by basket weaving, exhibited an affinity with those of
their neighbors (Kroeber, 1925). Coastal Tongva material culture, on the other hand, reflected an
elaborately developed artisanship most recognized through the medium of steatite, which was
rivaled by few other groups in Southern California.
The intricacies of Tongva social organization are not well known. There appeared to have been at
least three hierarchically ordered social classes, topped with an elite stratum consisting of the chiefs,
their immediate families, and other ceremonial specialists (Bean and Smith, 1978a). Clans owned
land, and property boundaries were marked by the clan's personalized symbol. Villages were
politically autonomous, composed of non-localized lineages, each with its own leader. The dominant
lineage's leader was usually the village chief, whose office was generally hereditary through the male
line. Occasionally several villages were allied under the leadership of a single chief. The villages
frequently engaged in warfare against one another, resulting in what some consider to be a state of
constant enmity between coastal and inland groups.
The Fontana region is within the eastern Tongva culture area. The central Tongva land was the
Los Angeles Basin; however, it extended east to include portions of the San Bernardino Valley. In the
San Bernardino Valley, the Tongva’s neighbors were the Serrano on the north and the Cahuilla farther
east. Away from the Santa Ana River this area was not well watered. Therefore, this portion of the
territory was not as densely populated as the coastal territory.
The village of Jurupa, also spelled Huruuvnga, was somewhat west of Riverside (McCawley, 1996:49).
Its proximity to Fontana is attested by Native consultants who described a “long range of hills at
Jurupa – west of Riverside,” termed Shokaava by José Zalvidea, the Tongva consultant to researcher
J.P. Harrington (McCawley, 1996:50). These Shokaava hills to the west of Riverside likely correspond
to the Jurupa Hills lying two-and-a-quarter miles south of the project site. In the late Mission Period
or just thereafter, much of the region was populated by the Serrano (Bean and Smith, 1978b), who
migrated into the area following the removal of the Tongva to Mission San Gabriel.
The first Franciscan establishment in Tongva territory and the broader region was Mission
San Gabriel, founded in A.D. 1772. Priests from the mission proselytized the Tongva throughout the
Los Angeles Basin. As early as 1542, however, the Tongva were in peripheral contact with the Spanish
even during the historic expedition of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo. However, it was not until 1769 that
the Spaniards took steps to colonize the territory of aboriginal Californians. Within a few decades,
most of the Tongva were incorporated into Mission San Gabriel and other missions in Southern
California (Engelhardt, 1931). Due to introduced diseases, dietary deficiencies, and forced reducción
(removal of non-agrarian Native populations to the mission compound), Tongva population
dwindled rapidly from these impacts. By 1900, the Tongva community had almost ceased to exist as
a culturally identifiable group. In the late 20th century, however, a renaissance of Native American
activism and cultural revitalization of Tongva descendants took place. Among the results of this
movement has been a return to a traditional name for the tribe, the Tongva, which is employed by
several of the bands and organizations representing tribal members. Many of the Tongva bands focus
on maintaining and teaching traditional knowledge, with special focus on language, place names and
natural resources.
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-4
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
2.2.3 Historic Context
2.2.3.1 Spanish/Mexican Era
In 1772, three years after the beginning of Spanish colonization of Alta California, Lt. Pedro Fages,
governor of the new province, and a small force of soldiers under his command became the first
Europeans to set foot in the San Bernardino Valley (Beck and Haase, 1974:15). The colonizers were
followed in the next few years by two other famed Spanish explorers, Lt. Colonel Juan Bautista de
Anza and Fr. Francisco Garcés, who traveled through the valley in the mid-1770s. Despite these early
visits, for the next 40 years this inland valley received little impact from the Spanish colonization
activities. The Spanish incursions into Alta California were concentrated along the coast.
For the bulk of the Spanish-Mexican Period, the San Bernardino Valley was considered a part of the
land holdings of Mission San Gabriel. The name “San Bernardino” was bestowed on the region by
about 1819, when the mission asistencia and an associated rancho were officially established under
this name in the eastern area of the valley (Lerch and Haenszel, 1981). After gaining independence
from Spain, in 1834 the Mexican government began the process of secularizing the missions in
Alta California, which in practice meant the confiscation of the Franciscan missions’ vast land
holdings that were to have been returned to the Native population, to be distributed among
prominent citizens of the province. During the 1830s and the 1840s, several large land grants were
created near present-day Fontana, but the project itself does not fall within the boundaries of any
private ranchos and remained public land when California became a part of the United States in 1848.
2.2.3.2 The American Period to Founding of Fontana
Used primarily as cattle ranches, the ranchos around Fontana saw little development until the
mid-19th century. A colony of Mormon settlers from Salt Lake City founded the town of
San Bernardino in 1851. The Southern Pacific Railroad was completed in the mid-1870s, and the
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway introduced a competing rail line in the 1880s during a
phenomenal land boom that swept through much of Southern California (Dumke, 1944). The boom
ushered in a number of new settlements in the San Bernardino Valley. In 1887, the Semi-Tropic Land
and Water Company purchased a large tract of land near the mouth of Lytle Creek. With that
acquisition and accompanied by the necessary water rights to the creek, Semi-Tropic laid out the
townsites of Rialto, Bloomington, and Rosena (Schuiling, 1984:90).
While Rialto and Bloomington were soon settled and began to grow, little development took place at
Rosena before the collapse of the 1880s land boom and the ensuing financial collapse of the
Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company (Schuiling, 1984:90, 102). In 1905, Azariel Blanchard “A.B.”
Miller (1878-1941), widely considered the founder of present-day Fontana, arrived in Rosena. Miller
hailed from the Imperial Valley and, along with his associates, soon established Fontana Farms on a
tract of land that eventually reached 20,000 acres (Anicic, 2005:32-40). Within the first ten years of
the 20th century, an irrigation system was constructed and much of the land was planted in grain
and citrus (Schuiling, 1984:102). Miller’s Fontana Farms became synonymous with the location,
which led to Rosena being renamed as Fontana in 1913.
Up to Miller’s death in 1941, Fontana remained primarily an agrarian settlement. It was recognized
as a town where domesticated animal husbandry of poultry, hog, and rabbit played a particularly
important role in the local economy (Schuiling, 1984:102). During World War II, however, the
establishment of the Kaiser Steel Mill initiated an alteration of this agrarian setting. With further
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-5
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
industrial enterprises moving into the area, Fontana became known as a center of heavy industry, a
characterization that lasted until recent years (Schuiling, 1984:106).
The Kaiser Steel Mill ceased operations in 1983. In response to demand for affordable housing,
Fontana, like many other cities in the San Bernardino Valley became a “bedroom community” for the
more developed cities of Los Angeles and western San Bernardino and Riverside counties.
Fontana’s progression from its agricultural roots to an industrial center and a suburban residential
community represents a prominent and characteristic trend in the history of the region. Historical
maps and aerial photographs reflect similar trends in the growth of the project area as well as nearby
neighborhoods. The land along Santa Ana Avenue that was primarily agricultural fields was recast
with notable industrial development between 1967 and 1994.
During the post-WWII era, agriculture gave way to suburban development as residential
neighborhoods and light industry gradually spread over former farmlands as seen in aerial photos
dating to 1948 and 1985 (NETR Online, 2019).
2.2.3.3 Project Site Land Use History
The available topographic maps for the project area start with 1898 (USGS, 1898). These show open
land in the project site and area 1896 through 1929 (USGS 1929), with the roads that would become
Citrus Avenue and Highland Avenue present as dirt roads. The 1939 topo map (USGS 1939) is the
first to show elevation contours and additional roads in the area, and the presence of scattered
structures to the south on Citrus Avenue and along Highland Avenue, but not in the immediate project
area. This configuration remains the same through 1941 (USGS 1941). By 1945, there is a road
present along the south boundary of the project parcel, Highland is now paved, and orchards are
indicated to the northeast and east (though likely had been there more several years before then) but
not on the project site. A single small structure is shown in the southwest corner of the parcel and it
has a cross on it, indicating a possible church; there is also a row of possible residences on the
western side of Citrus opposite the project site. This configuration remains the same through the
1959, 1960 and 1965 versions of the USGS map (USGS 1959 - 1965). By 1968, however, there are
three more structures on the east side of Citrus to the north of the church (USGS 1968), the nearest
likely being the residence seen in aerial photos post-dating this map and observed during the field
survey (see Section 4.3). There is now also a large residential community to the west of Citrus
Avenue and the surrounding orchards are now absent. The1980 USGS map is the same; however, the
1974 map still shows the orchards as present to the northeast across Highland Avenue and east
across Oleander Street, and the 1988 and 1999 (USGS 1974 - 1999) maps show the orchards as still
present on the north side of Highland. From the 2012 USGS map onward structures and agricultural
use are no longer presented, only roads. 2012 (USGS 2012) is the first map to indicate the presence
of SR-210 Freeway which parallels Highland Avenue to the north, as well as the residential
development bordering the project site to the south and east. Between 1999 and 2012, Fontana saw
the building and expansion of the SR-210 Foothill Freeway, situated just 1,200 feet to the north of the
project site – the route had been along the original Highland Avenue, which was now shifted 600 feet
to the south. In 2003, a 20-mile segment east from Glendora to Fontana was completed. The
remaining section east of the I-15 between Fontana and the SR-215 was opened on July 24, 2007,
allowing further use of the project area as commuter housing for the region. (Caltrans 2015:84,
2019.)
Historic aerial maps are available for this area of Fontana; the earliest dating to 1938 (NETROnline
2022). In 1938 Citrus Avenue was present as a dirt road, with a paved east/west road north of the
❖ SETTINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 2-6
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
present day Highland Avenue with farm residences along the south side and orchards to the north
(Highland is not yet present), and a dirt road along the southern edge of the project parcel; all
surrounding lands are open with the project site divided with the west half open and the east half
bordered by a row of trees; no agricultural use can be seen. In the 1948 aerial photo (NETROnline
2022) the setting is the same, though now Citrus Avenue is paved and there is a small structure in
the southwest area of the parcel (see as a possible church in the 1945 USGS topo); this southwest
structure appears somewhat larger in 1959 (NETROnline 2022), and there are now residences
present on the west side of Citrus Avenue across from the project site. By 1966 (NETROnline 2022)
there is also a structure in the northwest corner of the parcel (as seen in the 1968 USGS topo map)
and residential buildings now fill the land west of Citrus Avenue. The 1980 and 1985 aerial photos
(NETROnline 2022) show the presence of a growing number of outbuildings to the east of the
northern structure, and the row of trees surrounding lots on the east half of the project parcel are
thinning out. By 1994 the southern structure is gone (NETROnline 2022), though all else remains
the same. The 2002 aerial photo (NETROnline 2022) shows the start of major changes to this project
area, with the prior northern east/west road gone and replaced by the SR-210 Freeway accompanied
by the removal of the large farmhouse complex there, and with Highland Avenue constructed just
north of the project site. By 2005 (NETROnline 2022) the housing development to the south and east
sides of the site are now under construction; there are no further changes seen in the project site
itself. The southern and eastern housing developments bordering the project site are fully developed
in 2009 (NETROnline 2022). A gas station to the north of the project site is present on the southeast
corner of Highland Avenue and Citrus Avenue in 2014 (NETROnline 2022), and by then the array of
outbuildings behind (east) of the northern structure have been reduced to one. The final aerial photo
available was taken in 2018 (NETROnline 2022), which shows the dense set of trees remaining where
the northern buildings had been, but the building itself appears to have been demolished; there is
still open land to the north and northeast; the northern structure still present.
In 1971 this property was purchased by Evangelistic World Outreach Inc., until that entity was barred
from doing business in the United States. During that period, however, the property was transferred
in 1976 to a trustee for the organization, Mary L Mingo. When the church was reorganized as the
School of Divine Truth, Mingo transferred the deed of ownership back to the church in 1979 (US
District Court, Seventh Circuit: 2022).
❖ RESEARCH METHODS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 3-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
3.0 RESEARCH METHODS
The cultural resources inventory and related archival research included a background cultural
resources records check (archival research) at the SCCIC, California State University, Fullerton.
Additionally, a SLF search was requested from the NAHC.
3.1 Records Search
A cultural resource records search was requested from the SCCIC on March 8, 2022 and was
conducted on April 25, 2022 by SCCIC staff member Isabela Kott. That research was completed to
identify cultural resources on or near the project site. The local CHRIS facility for San Bernardino
County maintained at the SCCIC was reviewed to identify resources that have been previously
evaluated for historic significance, as well as to identify any previous completed cultural resources
survey reports.
Also searched and reviewed were the official records and maps for cultural resources and surveys in
Fontana, National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); Listed Properties and Determined Eligible
Properties (2012), and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (2012).
For the current study, the scope of the records search included a 0.5-mile buffer zone from the
project’s footprint (see Attachment A, Figure 3). The research effort was completed to assess the
sensitivity of the project site for both surface and subsurface cultural resources and to assist in
determining the potential to encounter such resources, especially prehistoric—i.e., Native
American—cultural remains, during earth-moving activities associated with construction of the
proposed project.
3.2 Field Survey
On April 12, 2022, archaeologist Stephen O’Neil visited the project site to conduct a pedestrian
survey. During the survey, the project site was carefully inspected for any indication of human
activities dating to the prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years or older).
3.3 Native American Outreach
On March 8, 2022, Mr. O’Neil contacted the NAHC via email notifying them of the project activities,
requesting a search of their SLF and requesting a list of local tribal organizations and individuals to
contact for project outreach. The NAHC replied on April 25, 2022 with a letter dated the same day
reporting on the SLF search findings and a list of 18 tribal organizations and individuals to contact.
Letters to local tribes were sent on May 11, 2022 to all of the tribal organizations and their
representatives listed in the NAHC letter (Attachment C).
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
4.0 FINDINGS
4.1 Records Search
4.1.1 Recorded Archaeological Sites
Based on the cultural resources records search, it was determined that no cultural resources have
been previously recorded within the project site boundary. Within the one-half-mile buffer zone,
there are three recorded historic-era cultural resources. Table 4.1-1 summarizes these resources.
Table 4.1-1
KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN A HALF-MILE RADIUS OF THE PROJECT BOUNDARY
Site Number Author(s) Date Type Description
P-36-006251
CA-SBR-
006251H
Paula Sutton 1989 Historic
Three foundations (concrete slab,
granitic cobblestone mortar) and a
very sparse scatter of
contemporary post-depositional
artifacts.
P-36-006589
CA-SBR-
006589H
Jeanette A.
McKenna 1990 Historic Grapeland Irrigation District main
canal segment.
P-36-007327
CA-SBR-
007327H
Paula Sutton 1992 Historic
Remains of a small collapsed
cobble concrete structure, and a
poured concrete cistern.
Located approximately 600 feet to the north of the project area is the remains of a small collapsed
cobble concrete structure, and a poured concrete cistern (CA-SBR-007327H), apparently associated
with agricultural activities. Associated artifacts include boards, wire nails: post 1890's tar paper,
corrugated metal, stucco, clear bottle glass and a pile of cobbles (Sutton 1992).
The remains of additional structures were located approximately 1,500 feet to the north of the
project area (CA-SBR-006251H). This historic resource includes three foundations (concrete slab,
granitic cobblestone mortar) and a very sparse scatter of contemporary post-depositional artifacts.
Two of the foundations (Features A and B), are remnants of a gas station that had been situated on
the southwest corner of old Highland Avenue and Citrus Avenue, before State Route 30 (now the 210
Freeway) was constructed along the path of the original Highland Avenue (now relocated to the
south). The third foundation (Feature C) is relatively large, but its function is unknown (Sutton 1989).
The Grapeland Irrigation District main canal (CA-SBR-006589H) is located 0.5 mile to the northeast
of the project area and leads from Lytle Creek drainage to the properties of the Graceland Irrigation
District. The canal was utilized by the district from 1892 to 1937 (McKenna 1990).
4.1.1 Previous Cultural Resource Investigations
According to the records at the SCCIC, there have been 20 previous cultural resource studies within
portions of the 0.5-mile buffer of the project (Table 4.1-2) (See Attachment D). Eighteen of these
studies are located outside of the project boundary and six of these reports identified cultural
resources within the 0.5-mile buffer zone, including the three resources described in Section 4.1.1
above. Two surveys are located inside the project area (SB-02621, SB-04207).
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Alexandrowicz et al. (1992), conducted cultural and paleontological resources investigations for the
North Fontana Infrastructure Area (SB-02621). Two of the historic archaeological sites (CA-SBR-
006251H and CA-SBR-006589H) were identified in this survey report. Hogan et al. (2004) prepared
a Historical and Archaeological Resources Survey Report for the city of Fontana’s Auto Mall Overlay
Zone (SB-04207). This project identified two historic resources within the 0.5-mile buffer zone (SBR-
06251 and SBR-07327) consisting of the sets of concrete foundations described above in Section
4.1.1.
Table 4.1-2
KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES WITHIN A HALF-MILE RADIUS OF THE PROJECT
BOUNDARY
Report
Number Author(s) Date Title Resources
SB-00438 Hearn, Joseph E. 1976
Archaeological - Historical
Resources Assessment of North
Fontana Park and Recreation
District at Highland Avenue and
Catawea Avenue in Fontana Area
NA
SB-00867 Smith, Gerald A. 1979
Cultural Resources Assessment, 10
Acre Parcel on Juniper Between
Walnut And Highland Ave.,
Fontana-Rialto Area
NA
SB-01011 Smith, Gerald A. 1980 Tentative Tract No. 11523,
Archaeological Survey NA
SB-01189 Scientific Resource
Surveys, Inc. 1981
Cultural Resources Report on the
Rancho Fontana Project Located in
the Fontana Area of the County of
San Bernardino
NA
SB-01611 Bissell, Ronald M. 1986
A Cultural Resources
Reconnaissance of the La Cuesta
Property, Fontana, San Bernardino
County, California
36-006588
SB-01611 Raschke, Rod 1986
Assessment of the Paleontological
Resources for the La Cuesta
Specific Plan, Fontana, California
NA
SB-01737
Hatheway, Roger G.
And Jeanette A.
Mckenna
1987
Determination of Eligibility Report
for the La Cuesta Property:
Historical, Architectural and
Archaeological Resources
36-011505
SB-01983 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1989
Historical and Archaeological
Investigations of the La
Cuesta/Sierra Lakes Tree
Relocation Project Area, Phases 2,
3, 4, and 5, Fontana, San
Bernardino County, California
NA
SB-02064 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1990
Historical and Archaeological
Investigations of the La
Cuesta/Sierra Lakes Tree
Relocation Project Area Phase 6,
Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California
36-006583,
36-006585,
36-006586,
36-006587,
36-006588,
36-006589
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Report
Number Author(s) Date Title Resources
SB-02096 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1990
Phase II Investigations: Historic
Documentation and Archaeological
Test Excavations of Sites Within
the La Cuesta/Sierra Lakes Tree
Relocation Project Area, Fontana,
San Bernardino County, California
36-006583,
36-006584,
36-006585,
36-006586,
36-006588,
36-006589
SB-02621
Alexandrowicz, J.
Steven, Anne Q.
Duffield-Stoll,
Jeanette A. Mckenna,
Susan R.
Alexandrowicz,
Arthur A. Kuhner, and
Eric Scott
1992
Cultural and Paleontological
Resources Investigations Within
the North Fontana Infrastructure
Area, City of Fontana, San
Bernardino County, California
36-004296,
36-006110,
36-006111,
36-006251,
36-006583,
36-006584,
36-006585,
36-006586,
36-006587,
36-006588,
36-006589,
36-006807,
36-006808,
36-006809,
36-006810,
36-006811,
36-006812,
36-006813,
36-006814,
36-006815,
36-006816
SB-02765 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1993
A Phase I Cultural Resources
Survey And Inventory for the
Sierra Lakes West Project Area,
Fontana, San Bernardino County,
Ca
NA
SB-02766 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1993
Addendum Report: A Phase I
Cultural Resources Investigation
for the Sierra Lakes West Project
Area, Fontana, San Bernardino
County, Ca
NA
SB-04018 Budinger, Fred 2002
Proposed Wireless Device
Monopine & Equipment Cabinet;
Cooper Site, 16194 Citrus Ave,
Fontana, Ca. 31pp
NA
SB-04020 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1996
Historic Documentation &
Archaeological Test Excavations of
Historic Archaeological Sites
Within the Sierra Lakes Tree
Location Project Area, Fontana, San
Bernardino County, Ca. 596pp
36-006583,
36-006584,
36-006585,
36-006586,
36-006587,
36-006588,
36-006589
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-4
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Report
Number Author(s) Date Title Resources
SB-04022 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 1999
Report Of Archaeological
Monitoring Activities at the Sierra
Lakes Project Site, City of Fontana,
San Bernardino County, Ca. 129pp
36-006583,
36-006584,
36-006585,
36-006586,
36-006587,
36-006588,
36-006589
SB-04207
Hogan, Michael, Bai
"Tom" Tang, Josh
Smallwood
2004
Historical/Archaeological
Resources Survey Report: Fontana
Auto Mall Overlay Zone, City of
Fontana, San Bernardino County,
Ca. 26pp
36-006251,
36-007327,
36-007332,
36-014197,
36-014200,
36-014201,
36-014202,
36-015291
SB-06016 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 2008
A Phase I Cultural Resources
Investigation of the Fontana
Unified School District Middle
School 8.75, Approximately 30.5
Acres Located in the City of
Fontana, San Bernardino Co.,
California
NA
SB-06392 Mckenna, Jeanette A. 2008
Addendum Report: Cultural
Resources Investigation of the
Fontana Unified School District
Middle School 8.75 Additional Lots
Located in the City of Fontana, San
Bernardino Co., California
NA
SB-06450
Tang, Bai "Tom", Terri
Jacquemain, and
Daniel Ballester
2009
Historical/Archaeological
Resources Survey Report: Fontana
Sports Park Project, City of
Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California.
NA
4.2 Native American Outreach
On March 8, 2022, Mr. O’Neil contacted the NAHC via email notifying them of the project, requesting
a search of their SLF and asking for a list of local tribal organizations and individuals to contact for
project outreach. The results of the search request were received April 25, 2022, at the office of UEI
from Mr. Andrew Green, Cultural Resources Analyst. The NAHC letter stated that “A record search of
the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the
information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were positive
[emphasis in the original].” The Commission identified the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh
Nation to contact for information regarding the site in the SLF (see Attachment C).
UEI prepared letters to each of the 18 tribal contacts representing 12 tribal organizations describing
the project and included a map showing the project's location, requesting a reply if they have
knowledge of cultural resources in the area, and asked if they had any questions or concerns
regarding the project (see Attachment C). On May 11, 2022, Mr. O’Neil mailed these letters to the 18
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-5
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
tribal contacts, and also emailed identical letters and maps to the tribal 17 contacts for which email
addresses were known. An email response was received from Lacy Padilla, Archaeologist for the Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians on May 11, 2022, indicating that the project is not located within
the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area and that they are deferring any comments to closer tribes. Another
email from the Agua Caliente Band on June 2, 2022 from Arysa B. Romero provided the same
statement. An email response was received from Ms. McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer for
the Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation on May 13, 2022, indicating that the Tribe does not
wish to comment on this project and defers to more local tribes.
Following up on the initial letter and email contacts, telephone calls were conducted by
Archaeological Technician Megan B. Doukakis on June 1, 2022, to complete the outreach process
following the period when replies could be made. These calls were to the fourteen tribal contacts
who had not already responded to UEI’s mailing and emails. Six telephone calls were placed with no
answer and messages were left describing the project and requesting a response. These were to
Anthony Morales, Chairperson of the Gabrieleno/ Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians,
Charles Alvarez, Councilmember of the Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe; Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson of
the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians; Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson of the Serrano Nation of
Mission Indians; Jessica Mauck, Director of Cultural Resources for the San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians, and Sandonne Goad, Chairperson of the Gabrielino/Tongva Nation.
Chairperson Andrew Salas, Chairperson of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation
responded during the telephone call stating that the tribe is involved in a project nearby the current
Citrus Condos project site called Monarch (approximately three miles to the north and north of the I-
15 freeway) and that metates have been found there. The Chairperson also indicated that to the east
of the current project area is a frisbee park (approximately six miles to the northeast in Rialto) where
cultural resources were found as well. Cultural resources were also found to the west of the project
area. Chairperson Salas requested that we resend him our letter and map and that they would get
back to us. This information was sent the same day. Christina Conley, Tribal Consultant and
Administrator for the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council responded by telephone
indicating that the tribe does not have any comments on the project due to it being located in Fontana.
Ann Brierty, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians indicated
during the telephone call that she would look into the project and one of her staff would get back to
us. The tribal receptionist for the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians indicated over telephone that
the project is well outside of the Band’s area and they would not have any comment on projects
outside of Riverside county. Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department for the Soboba Band of
Luiseño Indians indicated that they would defer any comments to San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians. (See Attachment C).
4.3 Pedestrian Survey Results
A pedestrian survey was conducted on April 12, 2022 by Mr. Stephen O’Neil. The survey consisted
of walking over, visually inspecting, and photographing the exposed ground surface of the project
site using standard archaeological procedures and techniques.
Survey of the ground surface was conducted by walking east/west transects 10 meters apart. The
surface was open natural terrain and flat, approximately 620 feet long east/west (Figure 4.3-1) and
200 feet wide north/south. The entire parcel’s surface appeared to be original native surface,
consisting of coarse sand, small pebbles, and medium and large rocks with little soil exposed, with
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-6
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
occasional small boulders one to two feet in diameter (Figure 4.3-2). This is consistent with the Qyf5
Lytle Creek alluvium designation for soils in this area (see Section 2.1 above).
Vegetation consisted of dry non-native grasses (Gramineae family) and sparse weeds consisting of
herons bill (Erodium sp.), black mustard (Brassica nigra), wild oats (Avena fatua) and various
chenopod species. In the eastern quarter of the property there were scattered native shrubs
consisting of a patch of deer weed (Lotus scoparius) (Figure 4.3-3); there was jimson weed (Datura
wrightii) in the disturbed soil of the northern area and dove weed (Croton setigerus) in the disturbed
soil of the eastern edge of the parcel. A number of ground squirrels were observed along with many
burrows, both fresh and old; no other animals were observed during the survey except small lizards;
there were signs of rabbit or hare in the form of fecal scats.
In the northwest quarter of the parcel there are the remains of two modern era structures (Figure
4.3-4). The western building remains (designated “A”) consist of partial wall foundations of
cinderblock on concrete foundation, approximately 35 feet wide (north/south) and 40 feet 6 inches
long (east/west) (Figure 4.3-5). There is no flooring. A pipe with a water handle and another pipe
with a gas control device remain along the outside of the southern wall 11 feet 6 inches from the east
end. This building is located approximately 42 feet east of Citrus Avenue. The eastern building
(designated “B”) is approximately 45 feet east of building A and is generally aligned with it. This
building also consists of remnants of walls made of cinderblock and concrete, with a partial concrete
floor integrated with the wall foundation. This structure is approximately 18 feet 3 inches long
(east/west) and 14 feet wide (north/south) (Figure 4.3-6). There are no signs of foundations or
interior partitions for rooms within either of the two buildings. There was no structural debris
observed within or outside the foundations. It is apparent that these two structures had been
demolished with all of the structural and interior material removed except for the base of the wall
foundations; the wall foundations themselves had been broken up and partially removed.
These two structures, by their location, appear to be represented by the structure indicated in the
USGS topo maps for this parcel present starting in the 1968 version through 1999 (from the next
version, 2012, onward individual structures are no longer shown). Building A appears in the 1966
aerial photo (not yet present in the 1959 photo), with a back outbuilding appearing in 1980 and
several outbuildings in 1994; they appear to have been demolished by 2018, the last available aerial
photo. The aerial photos indicate a main structure to the west (Building A), with several smaller
outbuildings behind to the east. (See Section 2.2.3.3.) Building A had a circular dirt driveway to its
western front from Citrus Avenue and may have been a residential structure. A DPR Primary Site
Record has been prepared for this historical resource and will be submitted to the SCCIC. (See
Attachment E.)
The USGS topo maps and aerial photos also indicate another, smaller structure on the project parcel
also near Citrus Avenue and to the south of Building A. This other building first appears in 1948 and
replaced by a larger building in 1959 (it was not yet present in 1938). It was present through 1985
and gone by the 2002 aerial photo; it also first appears in the 1955 USGS map with a cross on it
indicating it to be a religious building (not yet present in 1941); the building is present through 1999
(from the next version, 2012, onward individual structures are no longer shown) (see Section
2.2.3.3). However, no remnants of this structure were observed during the survey.
During the survey, the project site was carefully inspected for any indication of human activities
dating to the prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years or older). Ground surface visibility was
90%.
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-7
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for prehistoric cultural resources, features or
isolates in the parcel. Given the extent of agriculture conducted throughout the Fontana region up to
the recent past and known orchards near the project site, evidence for this was looked for during the
survey. However, there were no irrigation features present and the soil surface appears to be
undisturbed natural stone pavement (Figure 4.3-2).
Figure 4.3-1
PROJECT SITE OVERVIEW; VIEW FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER TO THE WEST
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-8
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 4.3-2
SURFACE SOIL AND VEGETATION
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-9
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 4.3-3
DEERWEED IN EASTERN QUARTER
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-10
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 4.3-4
OVERVIEW OF BUILDING A AND BUILDING B; VIEW TO THE NORTH
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-11
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 4.3-3
BUILDING A; VIEW TO THE SOUTH
❖ FINDINGS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 4-12
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 4.3-6
BUILDING B; VIEW TO THE EAST
❖ MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 5-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
5.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Site Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation of significance under CEQA uses criteria found in eligibility descriptions from the CRHR.
Generally, a resource is to be considered historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing in
the California Register [Public Resources Code § 5024.1; California Code of Regulations
§ 15064.5(a)(3)]. These criteria provide that a resource may be listed as potentially significant if it:
• Is associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of California history and cultural heritage.
• Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
• Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction,
or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic value.
• Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
5.2 Potential Effects
No CRHR- or NRHP-identified prehistoric or historic cultural resources are present on the project
site and so will not be adversely affected by the project. However, the presence of buried cultural
(prehistoric and/or historic archaeological) resources cannot be ruled out. If prehistoric and/or
historic artifacts are observed during subsurface excavation, work should be stopped in that area and
a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor should be on call to assess the finds.
❖ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 6-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were identified in the CHRIS record literature
search in the project site. Four historic era structures and one historic water pump and distribution
center were within the half mile radius of the project area, but apparently have been demolished and
removed since being recorded in 1989 and the early 1990s. Historical maps indicate that the project
site had been open land but possibly used for agriculture between 1955 and 1965.
Seven of the contacted tribes responded to outreach contacts, with six of them stating that the project
site is outside their area of interest or noting any concerns. Chairperson Andrew Salas of the
Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, however, stated that he is aware of cultural
resources, including metates, being recovered from three projects surrounding the current Citrus
Condos parcel several miles to the north and east (see Section 4.2 and Attachment C).
This cultural resources study’s findings based on the records search and pedestrian survey suggest
that there is a low potential for the presence of prehistoric cultural resources. If prehistoric and/or
historic items are observed during subsurface activities, work should be stopped in that area and a
qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor should be called to assess the findings and
retrieve the material.
The remnants of two historic structures in the northwest area of the project site do not warrant
preservation. However, there is the strong potential for the presence of one or more buried refuse
pits with trash from the residential structure to the west and debris from the work area to the east.
A monitor should be present during grading and trenching in these areas to recover material from
these potential deposits to better understand the nature of these structures possibly dating back to
the 1930s.
While the project site as a whole appears to be relatively undisturbed, it is not recommended that an
archaeological monitor be present during ground-disturbing activities throughout the project site
(except as noted above). However, if prehistoric and/or historic items are observed during
subsurface activities, work should be stopped in that area and a qualified archaeologist and Native
American monitor be retained to assess the finding(s) and retrieve the material.
If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with this project, work will halt in
that area and the San Bernardino County Coroner will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code). The Coroner will determine whether the remains are of recent human origin or older Native
American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of the supervising archaeologist, determines that the
remains are prehistoric, they will contact the NAHC. The NAHC will be responsible for designating
the most likely descendant (MLD), who will make recommendations as to the manner for handling
these remains and further provide for the disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of the
California Health and Safety Code. Following notification by the NAHC, the MLD will make these
recommendations within 48 hours of having access to the project site following notification by the
NAHC. These recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of
human remains and items associated with Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety
Code).
While review of USGS maps indicates that the parcel was not used for orchard crops (as was common
in the immediate area), the aerial photos suggest that at least the eastern half of the parcel was used
for agriculture in the 1930s (and likely beforehand) through early 1960s (see Section 2.2.3.3). They
also indicate the presence of three simple structures in the west edge of the parcel in the mid-to late-
❖ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 6-2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Twentieth century, now gone. Still, the natural appearance of the surface indicates this land is
relatively undisturbed. The nature of the land and absence of nearby water resources suggest that
the project site would not have supported prehistoric habitation or anything other than casual
resource gathering.
❖ REFERENCES ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 7-1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
7.0 REFERENCES
Alexandrowicz, J. Steven, Anne Q. Duffield-Stoll, Jeanette A. McKenna, Susan R. Alexandrowicz,
Arthur A. Kuhner, and Eric Scott
1992 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Investigations Within the North Fontana
Infrastructure Area, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Archaeological
Consulting Services. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State
University, Fullerton.
Anicic, John Charles, Jr.
2005 Images of America: Fontana. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco.
Basgall, Mark E., and D. L. True
1985 Archaeological Investigations in Crowder Canyon, 1973-1984: Excavations at Sites
SBR-421B, SBR-421C, SBR-421D, and SBR-713, San Bernardino County, California. On file,
South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.
Bean, Lowell John, and Charles R. Smith
1978a Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, William C. Sturtevant, general editor,
vol. 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538-549. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, DC.
1978b Serrano. In Handbook of North American Indians, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, vol. 8,
California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 570-574. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Beck, Warren A., and Ynez D. Haase
1974 Historical Atlas of California. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2019 Officially Designated State Scenic Highways and Historic Parkways (XLSX). Sacramento:
California Department of Transportation. Retrieved May 18, 2022.
2015 2014, Named Freeways, Highways, Structures and Other Appurtenances in California.
Sacramento: California Department of Transportation. Archived from the original (PDF) on
May 30, 2015. Retrieved May 18, 2022.
Chartkoff, Joseph L., and Kerry Kona Chartkoff
1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
Dumke, Glenn S.
1944 The Boom of the Eighties. Huntington Library, San Marino, California.
Engelhardt, Zephyrin, O.F.M.
1931 San Gabriel Mission and the Beginnings of Los Angeles. Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago.
Goodman, John D.
2002 Archaeological Survey of the Charter Communications Cable Project, Mountaintop Ranger
District, San Bernardino National Forest, California. San Bernardino National Forest Technical
Report 05-12-BB-102. San Bernardino, California.
❖ REFERENCES ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 7-2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Goodman, John D., II, and M. McDonald
2001 Archaeological Survey of the Southern California Trails Association Event Area, Little Pine
Flats, Mountaintop Ranger District, San Bernardino National Forest, California.
San Bernardino National Forest Technical Report 05-12-BB-106. San Bernardino, California.
Grenda, Donn
1993 Archaeological Treatment Plan for CA-RIV-2798/H, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County,
California. On file at Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.
1997 Continuity and Change: 8,500 Years of Lacustrine Adaptation on the Shores of Lake Elsinore.
Statistical Research Technical Series 59. Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson, Arizona.
Howard, W. J., and L. M. Raab
1993 Olivella Grooved Rectangle Beads as Evidence of an Early Period Southern California Channel
Island Interaction Sphere. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(3):1-11.
Horne, Melinda C., and Dennis P. McDougall
2008 CA-RIV-6069: Early Archaic Settlement and Subsistence in the San Jacinto Valley, Western
Riverside County, California. On file at Eastern Information Center, University of California,
Riverside.
Keller, Jean S., Jean Salpas, and Daniel F. McCarthy
1989 Data Recovery at the Cole Canyon Site (CA-RIV-1139), Riverside County, California. Pacific
Coast Archeological Society Quarterly 25(1):1-89.
Kroeber, Alfred
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin No. 78,
Washington, D.C.
Lerch, Michael K., and Arda M. Haenszel
1981 Life on Cottonwood Row. Heritage Tales 1981:33-71. Fourth Annual Publication of the City of
San Bernardino Historical Society, San Bernardino, California.
McCawley, William
1996 The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum Press, Banning,
California/Ballena Press, Novato, California.
McKenna, Jeanette A.
1990 Primary Record for CA_SBR-6589H. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center,
California State University, Fullerton.
Milburn, Doug, U.K. Doan, and John D. Goodman II
2008 Archaeological Investigation at Baldy Mesa-Cajon Divide for the Baldy Mesa Off-Highway-
Vehicle Recreation Trails Project, San Bernardino National Forest, San Bernardino County,
California. San Bernardino National Forest Technical Report 05-12-53-091. San Bernardino,
California.
❖ REFERENCES ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 7-3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Morton, Douglas M. and Johnathan C. Matti
2001 Geologic Map of the Devore 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino County, California United States
Geological Survey and Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside.
NETR Online
2019 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity, taken in 1938, 1948, 1959, 1966, 1968, 1980, 1985,
1994, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2018. http://www.historicaerials.com.
Accessed May 20, 2022.
O’Connell, James F., Philip J. Wilke, Thomas F. King, and Carol L. Mix (editors.)
1974 Perris Reservoir Archaeology: Late Prehistoric Demographic Change in Southeastern
California. California Department of Parks and Recreation Archaeological Report 14.
Sacramento, California.
Porcasi, Judith F.
1998 Middle Holocene Ceramic Technology on the Southern California Coast: New Evidence from
Little Harbor, Santa Catalina Island. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology
20:270-284.
Schuiling, Walter C.
1984 San Bernardino County: Land of Contrasts. Windsor Publications, Woodland Hills, California.
Sutton, Paula
1989 Primary Record for CA-SBR-6251H. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center,
California State University, Fullerton.
1992b Primary Record for CA-SBR-007327H. On file at the South Central Coastal Information
Center, California State University, Fullerton.
United States District Court, Seventh Circuit
2022 United States District Court, Seventh Circuit, United States of America; Intervening Appellant,
V. Evangelistic World Outreach Inc., Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 08-4167, 09-2042. Decided:
December 30, 2000. Retrieved May 18, 2022.
USGS (United States Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior)
1896 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
1929 Devore 7.5’, Calif., USGS Quadrangle map.
1939 Devore 7.5’, Calif., USGS Quadrangle map.
1941 Devore 7.5’, Calif., USGS Quadrangle map.
1955 Devore 7.5’, Calif., USGS Quadrangle map.
1959 Devore 7.5’, Calif., USGS Quadrangle map.
1965 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
❖ REFERENCES ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Page 7-4
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
1968 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
1974 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
1999 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
2012 Devore, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
Warren, Claude N.
1984 The Desert Region. In Michael J. Moratto (ed.), California Archaeology, pp. 339-430. Academic
Press, Orlando, Florida.
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
ATTACHMENTS
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
ATTACHMENT A
PROJECT MAPS
❖ ATTACHMENTS❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment A, Page 1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 1
PROJECT REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
\
❖ ATTACHMENTS❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment A, Page 2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 2
PROJECT STUDY AREA
❖ ATTACHMENTS❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment A, Page 3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Figure 3
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WITH APE SHOWN AND HALF-MILE BUFFER ZONE
❖ ATTACHMENTS❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
ATTACHMENT B
PERSONNEL BACKGROUND
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment B, Page 1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA
Cultural Resources Manager, Cultural Anthropology/Archaeology
Education
▪ M.A., Anthropology (Ethnography emphasis), California State University, Fullerton, CA, 2002
▪ B.A., Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach, CA, 1979
Professional and Institutional Affiliations
▪ California Mission Studies Association
▪ City of Laguna Beach Environmental Sustainability Committee, appointed 2012
▪ Orange County Natural History Museum; Board Member
▪ Pacific Coast Archaeological Society; Board Member and Past President
▪ Society for California Archaeology
Professional Registrations and Licenses
▪ Register of Professional Archaeologists (No. 16104) (current)
▪ Riverside County, CA, Cultural Resource Consultant (No. 259) (current)
▪ Cultural Resource Field Director, BLM Permit (CA-13-19) – California, 2013
▪ NEPA and CEQ Consultation for Environmental Professionals; course by the National Association of
Environmental Professionals, 2013
Professional Experience
Mr. O'Neil has 30 years of experience as a cultural anthropologist in California. He has researched
and written on archaeology, ethnography, and history. Mr. O'Neil has archaeological experience in
excavation, survey, monitoring, and lab work. Most of this has been on Native American prehistoric
sites, but also includes Spanish, Mexican, and American period adobe sites. His supervisory
experience includes excavation and survey crew chief and project director of an adobe house
excavation. He has a wide range of expertise in Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessments,
archaeological resource assessment surveys, salvage operations, and cultural background studies for
various EIR projects. Mr. O'Neil has worked for cultural resource management firms as well as
government agencies and Native American entities. He has prepared technical reports as well as
published journal articles.
Select project experience
Inglewood Avenue Corridor Widening Project, City of Lawndale, Los Angeles County, CA: 2013-
2014
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. The City of Lawndale is widening
Inglewood Avenue from Marine Avenue north. The project uses Caltrans funds and the cultural
resources report was prepared in Caltrans format. A separate historic properties report was
prepared as well. Prepared for Huitt-Zollars Engineering.
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment B, Page 2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Via Ballena Storm Drain Relocation, City of San Clemente, Orange County, CA: 2013
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. This residential area has a damaged
storm drain under Via Ballena that was causing earth movement and erosion. The requirements for
state funding, and cultural resources inventory report was required. Prepared for the City of
San Clemente.
Pine Canyon Road – Three Points Road to Lake Hughes Road, Los Angeles County, CA: 2013
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. This nine-mile portion of Pine Canyon
Road lies partially within the Angeles National Forest. A series of widening and culvert repairs is
planned by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). An assessment was
made of possible cultural resources, historic and prehistoric that may be affected by the construction,
and four historic sites were recorded. Prepared for LACDPW.
Alton Parkway Extension Project, Cities of Irvine and Lake Forest, Orange County, CA: 2012
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological and paleontological monitoring, archaeological
excavation, cultural resource records search, Native American contacts and report writing for this
project. Alton Parkway was extended 2.1 miles between the cities of Irvine and Lake Forest. For the
portion within the City of Irvine, UltraSystems conducted monitoring and excavation services. One
prehistoric site was excavated and reported on; a series of living features were discovered and also
reported. The final monitoring report described the paleontological and archaeological findings. A
separate technical report on the archaeological excavations was also prepared. Mr. O’Neil directed
research into historic and prehistoric background and prepared the final assessment of potential
impacts. Prepared for the Orange County Department of Public Works.
NEPA and CEQA Documentation, Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System
(LA-RICS), Los Angeles County, CA: 2011-2014
Mr. O’Neil is part of the UltraSystems team currently preparing technical studies and NEPA and CEQA
documentation toward the construction of LA-RICS, an $800-million emergency communications
system due to be operational in 2016. LA-RICS will provide a highly-coordinated emergency
communications system to all first responders to natural and man-made disasters throughout Los
Angeles County. Mr. O’Neil is the cultural and historical resources studies team leader, directing five
researchers. These studies include coordination of field visits to all 260-plus locations for an
archaeologist and/or an architectural historian with agency escorts to observe and record any onsite
prehistoric and historic features, performing records and literature searches at archaeology
information centers and local archives, contacting local agencies for historically listed structures and
districts, coordinate public notices of the project throughout Los Angeles County, consultation with
the NAHC and all local tribal organizations, and direct consultation with the California State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO). This information was compiled by Mr. O’Neil and is used to prepare FCC
historical resource forms which were submitted to the SHPO for review.
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment B, Page 3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Megan B. Doukakis, M.A.
Archaeological Technician
Education
▪ M.A. Public Archaeology, California State University, Northridge, 2012–2018
▪ B.A., Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach, 2011
▪ University of California, Los Angeles - Pimu Catalina Archaeological Field School, 2010
▪ International Scholar Laureate Program: Delegation on Anthropology and Archaeology in China,
2009
▪ Earthwatch Institute, “Unearthing Mallorca’s Past” archaeological excavation, Mallorca, Spain, 2005
Professional and Institutional Affiliations
▪ Phi Kappa Phi National Honor Society, 2011
▪ Sigma Alpha Lambda, National Leadership and Honor Organization, 2010
▪ Society for California Archaeology Membership 2012–2015
Professional Experience
Mrs. Doukakis has worked in the field of cultural resource management for seven years at
environmental firms. Before this Mrs. Doukakis had participated in multiple field schools in Southern
California and abroad. She has experience in survey, excavation, laboratory work, and information
searches. Mrs. Doukakis holds the title of Archaeological Technician at UltraSystems Environmental.
Prior to this, she completed a CRM internship at UltraSystems. These positions have provided her
with the opportunity to contribute to proposals, final reports, project scheduling, archaeological
record searches and paleontological, archaeological and Native American monitor organizing for
projects.
Select project experience
Results of the Condition Assessment, Site Monitoring, and Effects Treatment Plan (CASMET)
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, CA
Client: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Duration: 5/11 to 9/11
Mrs. Doukakis conducted survey and excavation for the USMC Base Camp Pendleton condition
assessment project. Areas were tested around Camp Pendleton for the presence and condition of
cultural material previously recorded. She also conducted laboratory work and curation for the
material collected within excavations. Mrs. Doukakis contributed to the final report with background
records searches and prehistoric and historic background writing for the report.
Archaeological Excavation Results Report for the Alton Parkway Extension Project, Orange
County, CA
Client: Orange County Department of Public Works; Contract: $357,170, 10/10 to 6/12
Mrs. Doukakis participated in the Alton Parkway project, City of Irvine, Orange County, CA. She was
responsible for cleaning and cataloging the artifacts recovered from the excavation and surface
collections. She also contributed to the final report by compiling the historical background
information.
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment B, Page 4
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties ADA Wheelchair Access Ramp Improvement
Project, City of Lake Forest, Orange County, CA
Client: City of Lake Forest/Penco, Contract: $2,981.62, Duration: 6/12 to 7/12
Mrs. Doukakis contributed to the cultural resource records search, field survey, Native American
contacts and report writing for this project. This residential area required wheelchair access ramps
on every corner in this neighborhood. An assessment of the possible cultural resources that may be
affected with this construction was made for the City of Lake Forest. Mrs. Doukakis contributed the
historic and prehistoric background, and the assessment of the possible resources in the area.
Tenaska Solar Projects Imperial Solar Energy Center–South; Imperial Solar Energy Center–
West; and Wistaria Ranch, Imperial County, CA
Client: Tenaska/CSOLAR Development, Contract: $3,441,809, 10/13 to 8/15.
Mrs. Doukakis conducted Native American contacts for field monitoring, coordinated with
subcontractors to initiate cultural and paleontological field surveys, for the several solar energy
projects being handled by UltraSystems Environmental in the El Centro area, Imperial County, CA.
She contributed different parts of the survey report and monitoring program documents, including
historic and prehistoric background, editorial review. At ISEC- West, Mrs. Doukakis was responsible
for contacting and organizing Tribal monitors for this project. She contacted tribal organizations and
inquired about their interest in providing tribal monitors for this project. directly organized with
Native American groups to sign agreements, and fill out tax paperwork. She was also responsible for
organizing and keeping track of and gathering field log from monitors from six tribal groups. She also
recovered previously recorded artifacts in the field before the start of the project.
NEPA and CEQA Documentation, Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications
System -Long Term Evolution, Los Angeles County, CA
Client: LARICS Joint Powers Authority, Contract: $3,051,312, 1/12 to 1/15.
UltraSystems’ team prepared technical studies and NEPA and CEQA documentation toward the
construction of LA-RICS-LTE, an $800-million emergency communications system that will provide
a highly coordinated emergency communications system to all first-responders to natural and
man-made disasters throughout Los Angeles County. For this project Mrs. Doukakis conducted
record searches at the South Central Coastal Information Center for the Department of Commerce on
over 300 project sites throughout the County of Los Angeles. She helped prepare letters to the NAHC
and tribal organizations associated with the project area. Mrs. Doukakis contributed to contacting,
organizing, and scheduling architectural historians to conduct historical research around the project
areas. Letters were written for contact to local agencies and cities. A public notice was constructed
and published in three local newspapers. Mrs. Doukakis also constructed hundreds of Federal
Communications Commission 620 and 621 forms for submission to California State Historic
Preservation Office.
Newton Canyon Monitoring Project, CA
Client: County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Contract: $2,930.00, Duration: 7/13 to 12/13
Mrs. Doukakis was an archaeological monitor for this project. She monitored all ground disturbing
activities as well as lightly surveying the area for cultural material. Mrs. Doukakis also conducted the
records center research at the South Central Coastal Information Center at CSUF. Through email,
letter, and telephone correspondence, Mrs. Doukakis contacted the NAHC and associated tribal
groups.
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
ATTACHMENT D
CHRIS RECORDS SEARCH BIBLIOGRAPHY
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment D, Page 1
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment D, Page 2
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖
7167/Citrus Avenue Condominiums Project Attachment D, Page 3
Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory June 2022