HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix H - Paleo Resources AssessmentPALEONTOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE SOUTHRIDGE PROJECT
CITY OF FONTANA
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APNs 237-411-13 and -14
Prepared for:
New Bridge Homes 500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 570 Newport Beach, California 92660
Submitted to:
City of Fontana Community Development Department 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335
Prepared by:
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064
March 21, 2022
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Paleontological Database Information
Author: Todd A. Wirths, M.S., Senior Paleontologist, California Professional Geologist No. 7588
Consulting Firm: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 (858) 679-8218 Report Date: March 21, 2022 Report Title: Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project, Fontana, San Bernardino County, California (APNs 237-411-13 and -14) Prepared for: New Bridge Homes 500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 570 Newport Beach, California 92660
Submitted to: City of Fontana Community Development Department 8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335 Prepared by: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064
USGS Quadrangle: USGS Fontana, California (7.5-minute), Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian.
Study Area: 37.8 acres Key Words: Paleontological assessment; surficial alluvial fan deposits; no
sensitivity; no monitoring recommended; City of Fontana.
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table of Contents
Section Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION .......................................................................1
II. REGULATORY SETTING .......................................................................................1
State of California .....................................................................................................1
City of Fontana ..........................................................................................................4
III. GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................5
IV. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................7
Definition ....................................................................................................................7
Fossil Locality Search ................................................................................................7
Project Survey ............................................................................................................8
V. PALEONTOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ....................................................................8
Overview .....................................................................................................................8
Professional Standards ..............................................................................................8
City Assessment of Paleontological Sensitivity .........................................................9
VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................9
Paleontological MMRP............................................................................................10
VII. CERTIFICATION ....................................................................................................12
VIII. REFERENCES CITED ...........................................................................................12
Appendices
Appendix A – Qualifications of Key Personnel
List of Figures
Figure Page
Figure 1 General Location Map .................................................................................2
Figure 2 Project Location Map ...................................................................................3
Figure 3 Geologic Map...............................................................................................6
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1
I. INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION
A paleontological resource assessment has been completed for the Southridge Project
(“project”), located southeast of the intersection of Live Oak Avenue and Village Drive in the
southwestern portion of the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California (Figures 1 and
2). The project occupies two parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 237-411-13 and -14) totaling
37.8 acres. On the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute, 1:24,000-scale Fontana, California
topographic quadrangle map, the project is located in Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 6
West, of the San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian (Figure 2). The project parcels are currently
occupied as industrial and residential properties. The construction of a residential development
with a trailhead park, associated landscaping, and infrastructure is proposed for the project.
As the lead agency, the City of Fontana has required the preparation of a paleontological
assessment to evaluate the project’s potential to yield paleontological resources. The
paleontological assessment of the project included a review of paleontological literature and
fossil locality records for a previous project in the area; a review of the underlying geology; and
recommendations to mitigate impacts to potential paleontological resources.
II. REGULATORY SETTING
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which is patterned after the National
Environmental Policy Act, is the overriding environmental regulation that sets the requirement
for protecting California’s paleontological resources. CEQA mandates that governing permitting
agencies (lead agencies) set their own guidelines for the protection of nonrenewable
paleontological resources under their jurisdiction.
State of California
Under “Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,” as
amended in December 2018 (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14, Division 6,
Chapter 3, Sections 15000 et seq.), procedures define the types of activities, persons, and public
agencies required to comply with CEQA. Section 15063 of the CCR provides a process by
which a lead agency may review a project’s potential impact to the environment, whether the
impacts are significant, and provide recommendations, if necessary.
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4
In CEQA’s Environmental Checklist Form, one of the questions to answer is, “Would the
project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?” (Appendix G, Section VII, Part f). This is to ensure compliance with California Public
Resources Code Section 5097.5, the law that protects nonrenewable resources including fossils,
which is paraphrased below:
a) A person shall not knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy,
injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds,
archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized
footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, rock art, or any other
archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands,
except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction
over such lands.
b) As used in this section, “public lands” means lands owned by, or under the
jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public
corporation, or any agency thereof.
c) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor.
City of Fontana
In the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) of the City of Fontana General Plan
Update 2015–2035, two paleontological resource mitigation measures are specified, MM-CUL-4
and MM-CUL-5. MM-CUL-4 must be implemented before construction starts, while MM-CUL-
5 must be implemented before, during, and after construction (City of Fontana 2018a). The
measures are as follows:
MM-CUL-4 A qualified paleontologist shall conduct a pre-construction field
survey of any project site within the Specific Plan Update area that is underlain by
older alluvium. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that provide
specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e.,
paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate.
MM-CUL-5 Should mitigation monitoring of paleontological resources be
recommended for a specific project within the project site, the program shall
include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
• Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid
removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time
during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
• Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, earth-
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5
disturbing activities shall be diverted elsewhere until the monitor has
completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the
grading contractor shall immediately divert construction and notify the
monitor of the find.
• All recovered fossils shall be prepared, identified, and curated for
documentation in the summary report and transferred to an appropriate
depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum).
A summary report shall be submitted to the City of Fontana. Collected specimens
shall be transferred with [a] copy of [the] report to [the] San Bernardino County
Museum (City of Fontana 2018a).
III. GEOLOGY
The project is located at the foot of the northwestern corner of the Jurupa Mountains.
The Jurupa Mountains are a part of the Perris tectonic block and constitute the northern-most
portion of the Peninsular Ranges (MacKevett 1951; Morton 2003). The Jurupa Mountains
mainly consist of Cretaceous granitic and pre-Cretaceous metamorphic rocks, with the lower
slopes mantled by a sedimentary detritus of Pleistocene-aged alluvial fan deposits. The
promontory just east of the project is composed of tonalite, a type of granitic rock, and was the
setting of the former Declezville Quarry. The eastern edge of the project includes exposed
tonalite (pink areas labeled as “Kt” in Figure 3, after Morton 2003).
At the project, the eastern portion is mapped as artificial fill deposits (brown areas
labeled as “Qaf” in Figure 3), consisting of quarry tailings of waste rock and earthen materials
derived from activities at the adjacent Declezville Quarry (MacKevett 1951; Morton 2003; Lump
and Walker 2021). The Declezville Quarry was the site of the extensive extraction of tonalite for
building purposes, mostly for projects in Los Angeles County, and included a rail line to
transport the tonalite. The rail line can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, and terminates within the
project boundaries. The quarry ceased production in 1950 (MacKevett 1951). In a geotechnical
investigation conducted for the eastern portion of the project (i.e., east of the railroad tracks
indicated on Figures 2 and 3), Lump and Walker (2021) indicated a thickness as much as 15 feet
for the artificial fill deposits.
The western portion of the project consists of Holocene and late Pleistocene (present day
to approximately 120,000 years ago [Cohen and Gibbard 2011]) young alluvial fan deposits of
the Lytle Creek fan (light yellow areas labeled “Qyfl” in Figure 3), consisting of unconsolidated,
gray, cobbly and bouldery alluvium. These alluvial deposits also likely underlie most or all the
mapped artificial fill materials at the project’s eastern portion. Older Pleistocene-aged alluvial
fan deposits (“Qof2” and “Qof1” on Figure 3) may also be present beneath the artificial fill, also
consisting of coarse, cobbly and bouldery materials (Morton 2003).
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7
Lump and Walker (2021) estimated a thickness of five to 20 feet for the alluvial deposits. The
lower contact of the alluvial deposits is as much as 28 feet deep. Weathered tonalite is present
beneath the alluvium, but in some areas, artificial fill has been placed directly on tonalite. Lump
and Walker (2021) also indicated that some areas, now buried under artificial fill, appear to have
had alluvial deposits subsequently graded away during quarry operations.
Lump and Walker (2021) provided earthwork recommendations for the eastern portion of
the proposed project: complete removal of the quarry tailings (artificial fill), as these materials
were deemed unsuitable for building purposes; and over-excavation of native soils (alluvium) to
an approximate depth of three or four feet, or depending on observed conditions and further
testing, for the placement of compacted fill for the slab-on-grade structures. IV. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Definition
Paleontological resources are the remains of prehistoric life that have been preserved in
geologic strata. These remains are called fossils and include bones, shells, teeth, and plant
remains (including their impressions, casts, and molds) in the sedimentary matrix, as well as
trace fossils such as footprints and burrows. Fossils are considered older than 5,000 years of age
(Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 2010) but may include younger remains (subfossils) when
viewed in the context of local extinction of the organism or habitat, for example. Fossils are
considered a nonrenewable resource under state and local guidelines (Section II of this report).
Fossil Locality Search
A paleontological literature review and collections and records search was performed for the
project with collection and locality records searches using reports obtained for prior nearby
projects from the Division of Geological Sciences at the San Bernardino County Museum
(SBCM), the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History (LACM), the Western Science
Center (WSC), and finally with data from published and unpublished paleontological literature.
The records searches indicated that the LACM and the WSC have no known fossil localities
within the project boundaries or near the project. However, several Pleistocene fossil localities
held by the SBCM are known near the project. The closest fossil locality is a partial skull from
Smilodon, the saber-toothed cat, located less than a mile away in the Declezville neighborhood,
south of (or below) Jurupa Avenue approximately between Live Oak Avenue and Citrus Avenue
(SBCM locality [loc.] 5.1.11; Reynolds, in Aron et al. 2018). Seven localities (SBCM locs.
5.1.14 - 5.1.17 and 5.1.19 - 5.1.21) lie about one-and-a-half miles northwest of the current
project. The bones of large and small Pleistocene-age mammals as well as terrestrial snails and
freshwater clams were recovered from these localities, mostly from clayey, silty sands from
depths ranging from five to 21 feet below the surface, when recorded. Mammals from these
localities include three species of rodents, cottontail rabbit, bison, camel, horse, mastodon, and
other unidentified large mammal remains.
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8
Project Survey
Staff personnel from Brain F. Smith and Associates, Inc., under the direction of Principal
Investigator Todd A. Wirths conducted a pedestrian survey of the project on March 9, 2022.
Aerial photographs, maps, and a compass permitted orientation and location of project
boundaries. Where possible, narrow transect paths were employed to ensure maximum lot
coverage. All exposed ground was inspected for paleontological materials. A survey form and
photographs documented the survey work undertaken.
The entire eastern half of the property has been cleared and dirt trails run throughout.
The eastern portion of Southridge Park and the base of the foothills east of the park are within
the western half of the project. The eastern half of the project contains highly impacted slopes
and the bases of low-lying foothills. The bedrock present within the project has been excavated,
manually broken, and pushed into piles along with the existing topsoil. Generally, the vegetation
encountered during the survey consisted of non-native weeds and grasses with eucalyptus and
pine trees present throughout the Southridge Park (western) portion of the project. No
paleontological resources, or evidence suggesting the presence of paleontological resources,
were observed during the survey.
V. PALEONTOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY
Overview
The degree of paleontological sensitivity of any particular area is based on a number of
factors, including the documented presence of fossiliferous resources on a site or in nearby areas,
the presence of documented fossils within a particular geologic formation or lithostratigraphic
unit, and whether or not the original depositional environment of the sediments is one that might
have been conducive to the accumulation of organic remains that might have become fossilized
over time. Holocene alluvium is generally considered to be geologically too young to contain
significant nonrenewable paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) and is thus typically assigned a
low paleontological sensitivity. Pleistocene (over 11,700 years old) alluvial and alluvial fan
deposits in the Inland Empire, however, often yield important terrestrial vertebrate fossils, such
as extinct mammoths, mastodons, giant ground sloths, extinct species of horse, bison, camel,
saber-toothed cats, and others (Jefferson 1991). These Pleistocene sediments are thus accorded a
High paleontological resource sensitivity.
Professional Standards
The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP 2010) has drafted guidelines that include
four categories of paleontological sensitivity for geologic units (formations) that might be
impacted by a proposed project, as listed below:
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9
• High Potential: Rock units from which vertebrate or significant invertebrate, plant, or
trace fossils have been recovered.
• Undetermined Potential: Rock units for which little information is available concerning
their paleontological content, geologic age, and depositional environment, and that
further study is needed to determine the potential of the rock unit.
• Low Potential: Rock units that are poorly represented by fossil specimens in institutional
collections or based on a general scientific consensus that only preserve fossils in rare
circumstances.
• No Potential: Rock units that have no potential to contain significant paleontological
resources, such as high-grade metamorphic rocks and plutonic igneous rocks.
Using these criteria, despite the presence of significant, nearby fossil localities, the
Holocene to late Pleistocene young alluvial fan deposits mapped at the project may be
considered to have a low potential to yield significant paleontological resources. The coarse
nature of the alluvium and the project’s proximity to the source of the deposits (the Jurupa
Mountains) are usually prohibitive to the preservation of vertebrate fossils. The artificial fill and
tonalite have no potential to yield fossils.
City Assessment of Paleontological Sensitivity
Section 5.4.1.5 of the City of Fontana’s draft EIR for the General Plan (City of Fontana
2018b) describes the paleontological sensitivity of the strata underlying the city. Based on
Pleistocene vertebrate fossils recovered from the city’s southwestern area (SBCM locs. 5.1.11,
5.1.14 - 5.1.17, and 5.1.19 - 5.1.21), subsurface “older fan” Pleistocene deposits are considered
by the City to have a high potential for yielding fossils. The overlying “younger fan” deposits at
the surface are considered by the City as having no potential to yield significant paleontological
resources. VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The project is characterized as partly covered by an artificial deposit of quarry tailings
(artificial fill) of variable thickness derived from rock quarry operations that took place during
the early to mid-twentieth century. These artificial fill deposits overlie Holocene and late
Pleistocene-aged young alluvial fan deposits, which are mapped at the surface on the west side of
the project. Some areas of alluvium appear to have been graded away during quarry operations,
prior to the placement of fill materials. In turn, the young alluvial deposits, when present, overlie
weathered tonatitic bedrock, while in other areas, artificial fill has been placed on tonalite.
Geotechnical recommendations for the project included the complete removal of the artificial fill
and over-excavation of the alluvium by approximately three to four feet in proposed structure
foundation areas, depending on actual conditions (Lump and Walker 2021).
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
10
Given the coarse nature and young age of the alluvium, the proximity of the alluvial
deposits to the mountain source, the shallow depths proposed for construction, and an
assignment of no paleontological potential for surficial young alluvial deposits by the City (City
of Fontana 2018b), paleontological monitoring is not recommended during earth-disturbance
activities at the project. Similarly, paleontological monitoring is not warranted for tonalite,
artificial fill, or any disturbed soils. However, if fossils of any sort are discovered during grading
and earthmoving activities, a paleontologist must be retained to develop a paleontological
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) consistent with the provisions of
CEQA, those of the City of Fontana (2018a), and those of the guidelines of the SVP (2010).
Implementation of the paleontological MMRP would mitigate any adverse impacts (loss or
destruction) to potential nonrenewable paleontological resources, if present, to a level below
significant.
Paleontological MMRP
The following paleontological MMRP guidelines, outlined below, are based on the
findings stated above. Paleontological monitoring may be reduced on the observations and
recommendations of the professional-level project paleontologist. The following MMRP, when
implemented, would reduce potential impacts of paleontological resources to a level below
significant:
1. If a fossil(s) is found, earth disturbance activities should be halted within a radius of
50 feet from the location of the fossil, and a project-level paleontologist shall be
consulted to determine the significance of the fossilized remains. If the fossil is
deemed significant by the project-level paleontologist, full-time monitoring should be
initiated at the project
2. Monitoring of mass grading and excavation activities shall be performed by a
qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor. Monitoring shall be conducted in
areas of grading or excavation in undisturbed sediments of alluvial fan deposits, at the
discretion of the project paleontologist.
3. Paleontological monitors will be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to
avoid construction delays. The monitor must be empowered to temporarily halt or
divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens in a timely
manner. Monitoring may be reduced if the potentially fossiliferous units are not
present in the subsurface, or, if present, are determined on exposure and examination
by qualified paleontological personnel to have low potential to contain fossil
resources. The monitor shall notify the project paleontologist, who will then notify
the concerned parties of the discovery.
4. Paleontological salvage during trenching and boring activities is typically from the
generated spoils and does not delay the trenching or drilling activities. Fossils are
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
11
collected and placed in cardboard flats or plastic buckets and identified by field
number, collector, and date collected. Notes are taken on the map location and
stratigraphy of the site, which is photographed before it is vacated, and the fossils are
removed to a safe place. On mass grading projects, discovered fossil sites are
protected by flagging to prevent them from being overrun by earthmovers (scrapers)
before salvage begins. Fossils are collected in a similar manner, with notes and
photographs being taken before removing the fossils. Precise location of the site is
determined with the use of handheld GPS units. If the site involves remains from a
large terrestrial vertebrate, such as large bone(s) or a mammoth tusk, that is/are too
large to be easily removed by a single monitor, a fossil recovery crew shall excavate
around the find, encase the find within a plaster and burlap jacket, and remove it after
the plaster is set. For large fossils, use of the contractor’s construction equipment
may be solicited to help remove the jacket to a safe location.
5. Isolated fossils are collected by hand, wrapped in aluminum foil, and placed in
temporary collecting flats or five-gallon buckets. Notes are taken on the map location
and stratigraphy of the site, which is photographed before it is vacated, and the fossils
are removed to a safe place.
6. Particularly small invertebrate fossils typically represent multiple specimens of a
limited number of organisms, and a scientifically suitable sample can be obtained
from one to several five-gallon buckets of fossiliferous sediment. If it is possible to
dry screen the sediment in the field, a concentrated sample may consist of one or two
buckets of material. For vertebrate fossils, the test is usually the observed presence of
small pieces of bones within the sediments. If present, multiple five-gallon buckets
of sediment can be collected and returned to a separate facility to wet-screen the
sediment.
7. In accordance with the “Microfossil Salvage” section of the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology guidelines (2010:7), bulk sampling and screening of fine-grained
sedimentary deposits (including carbonate-rich paleosols) must be performed if the
deposits are identified to possess indications of producing fossil “microvertebrates” to
test the feasibility of the deposit to yield fossil bones and teeth.
8. In the laboratory, individual fossils are cleaned of extraneous matrix, any breaks are
repaired, and the specimen, if needed, is stabilized by soaking in an archivally
approved acrylic hardener (e.g., a solution of acetone and Paraloid B-72).
9. Recovered specimens are prepared to a point of identification and permanent
preservation (not display), including screen-washing sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates. Preparation of individual vertebrate fossils is often
more time-consuming than for accumulations of invertebrate fossils.
10. Identification and curation of specimens into a professional, accredited public
museum repository with a commitment to archival conservation and permanent
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
13
meters. https://server.arcgisonline.com/ArcGIS/rest/services/Specialty/DeLorme_World _Base_Map/MapServer Jefferson, G.T. 1991. A catalogue of late Quaternary vertebrates from California: Part two, mammals. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Technical Reports, no. 7: i-v + 1-129. Lump, E., and Walker, G.R. 2021. Feasibility/Due Diligence-Level Geotechnical Assessment, Live Oak Project, Undeveloped Land Southeast of Live Oak Drive and Village Drive, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0237-411-14, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Unpublished consulting report prepared for Newbridge Homes, Newport Beach, California, by Petra Geosciences, Temecula, California. MacKevett, E.M. 1951. Geology of the Jurupa Mountains, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California. Division of Mines Special Report No. 5, State of California Dept. of Natural Resources, San Francisco. Morton, D.M. 2003. Preliminary geologic map of the Fontana 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, Version 1.0: U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03-418, scale 1:24,000. Reynolds, R.E. 2018. West Valley Connector, Geology and Paleontological Resources, in Aron, G., Richards, C., and Webster, B., Paleontological Identification Report and Evaluation Report, West Valley Connector Project. Unpublished consulting report prepared for the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, by Paleo Solutions, Inc., Monrovia, California. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2010. Standard procedures for the assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to paleontological resources; by the SVP Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee: http://vertpaleo.org/Membership/Member-Ethics/SVP_Impact_ Mitigation_Guidelines.aspx. United States Geological Survey. 1980. Fontana, California (USGS 7.5´ quadrangle series).
Paleontological Assessment for the Southridge Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX A Qualifications of Key Personnel
To dd A. W ir ths , MS, PG No. 7588
Senior Paleontologist
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.
14010 Poway Road Suite A
Phone: (858) 679-8218 Fax: (858) 679-9896 E-Mail: twirths@bfsa-ca.com
Education
Master of Science, Geological Sciences, San Diego State University, California 1995
Bachelor of Arts, Earth Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz 1992
Professional Certifications
California Professional Geologist #7588, 2003
Riverside County Approved Paleontologist
San Diego County Qualified Paleontologist
Orange County Certified Paleontologist
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour trained; current 8-hour annual refresher
Professional Memberships
Board member, San Diego Geological Society
San Diego Association of Geologists; past President (2012) and Vice President (2011)
South Coast Geological Society
Southern California Paleontological Society
Experience
Mr. Wirths has more than a dozen years of professional experience as a senior-level paleontologist
throughout southern California. He is also a certified California Professional Geologist. At BFSA, Mr.
Wirths conducts on-site paleontological monitoring, trains and supervises junior staff, and performs all
research and reporting duties for locations throughout Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside,
Orange, San Diego, and Imperial Counties. Mr. Wirths was formerly a senior project manager
conducting environmental investigations and remediation projects for petroleum hydrocarbon-
impacted sites across southern California.
Selected Recent Reports
2019 Paleontological Assessment for the 10575 Foothill Boulevard Project, City of Rancho Cucamonga,
San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc. Report on file at Brian F.
Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2019 Paleontological Assessment for the MorningStar Marguerite Project, Mission Viejo, Orange
County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates,
Inc., Poway, California.
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2
2019 Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Nimitz Crossing Project, City of San Diego. Prepared
for Voltaire 24, LP. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2019 Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for the Jack Rabbit Trail Logistics
Center Project, City of Beaumont, Riverside County, California. Prepared for JRT BP 1, LLC.
Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Oceanside Beachfront Resort Project, Oceanside, San
California. Prepared for S.D. Malkin Properties. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates,
Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program for the Nakase Project, Lake Forest, Orange
County, San California. Prepared for Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. Report on file at Brian F.
Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program for the Sunset Crossroads Project, Banning,
Riverside County. Prepared for NP Banning Industrial, LLC. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and
Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Assessment for the Ortega Plaza Project, Lake Elsinore, Riverside County.
Prepared for Empire Design Group. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.,
Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Resource Record Search Update for the Green River Ranch III Project, Green River
Ranch Specific Plan SP00-001, City of Corona, California. Prepared for Western Realco. Report
on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Assessment for the Cypress/Slover Industrial Center Project, City of Fontana, San
Bernardino County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc. Report on file at Brian F. Smith
and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2020 Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Imperial Landfill Expansion Project (Phase VI,
Segment C-2), Imperial County, California. Prepared for Republic Services, Inc. Report on file at
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2021 Paleontological Assessment for the Manitou Court Logistics Center Project, City of Jurupa Valley,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for Link Industrial. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and
Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2021 Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program for the Del Oro (Tract 36852) Project,
Menifee, Riverside County. Prepared for D.R. Horton. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and
Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2021 Paleontological Assessment for the Alessandro Corporate Center Project (Planning Case PR-2020-
000519), City of Riverside, Riverside County, California. Prepared for OZI Alessandro, LLC.
Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc., Poway, California.
2021 Paleontological Monitoring Report for the Boardwalk Project, La Jolla, City of San Diego.
Prepared for Project Management Advisors, Inc. Report on file at Brian F. Smith and
Associates, Inc., Poway, California.