The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAppendix D1 - Cultural❖ APPENDICES ❖ APPENDIX D1 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY FOR THE MIDLAND PLAZA PROJECT CITY OF FONTANA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (APN: 0241-051-16, 0241-051-17, 0241-051-32, 0241- 051-02 and 0241-051-01) Prepared for: Paul Dhaliwal, Owner Midland Investments, LLC 3270 Inland Empire Boulevard, Suite 430 Ontario, California 91764 Prepared by: Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA Brent Johnson, M.A. Megan B. Doukakis, M.A. UltraSystems Environmental Inc. 16431 Scientific Way Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 788-4900 September 29, 2022 Key Words: City of Fontana; San Bernardino County; Fontana, Calif. USGS Quad.; Historic Resources, Positive Results ❖ CULTURAL REPORT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page i September 2022 PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY FOR THE MIDLAND PLAZA PROJECT CITY OF FONTANA SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (APN: 0241-051-16, 0241-051-17, 0241-051-32, 0241- 051-02 and 0241-051-01) Paul Dhaliwal, Owner Midland Investments, LLC 3270 Inland Empire Boulevard, Suite 430 Ontario, California 91764 September 29, 2022 Reviewed by: Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA UltraSystems Environmental Inc. Date: September 29, 2022 ❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page ii September 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Description .............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Methods ................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 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 4.1.2 Previous Cultural Resource Investigations ............................................................... 4-2 4.2 Native American Outreach ............................................................................................................... 4-3 4.3 Pedestrian Survey Results ................................................................................................................ 4-4 4.4 National Register of Historic Places ............................................................................................. 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 1.0-mile Radius of the APE ....................................... 4-1 Table 4.1-2 - Known Cultural Resource Studies Within a 1.0-Mile Radius of the APE ......................... 4-2 Table 4.1-2 – Built Environmental Resources Directory Resources Within A Half -Mile Radius Of The Project Boundary ................................................................................................................................................................. 4-5 FIGURES Figure 4.3-1 – Southwest Corner of Parcel Along Montgomery Avenue; View to the Northeast ..... 4-1 Figure 4.3-2 – Ground Surface and Plow Lines; View to the North ............................................................... 4-1 Figure 4.3-3 – Features A and B (SCA-SBR-10660H) in Foreground; View to the South .................... 4-2 ❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page iii September 2022 Figure 4.3-5 – East End of Feature C (Foreground) and Feature D (Behind), Sierra Avenue to Left; View to South ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4-4 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Project Maps Attachment B Personnel Background Attachment C Native American Heritage Commission Record Search and Native American Contacts Attachment D Attachment E CHRIS Records Search CA-SBR-10660H Continuation Sheet ❖ INTRODUCTION ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 1-1 September 2022 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview This Phase I Cultural Resource Inventory was prepared for the City of Fontana Planning Department at the request of Midland Investments, LLC. This assessment was completed as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Midland Plaza (Project). The project consists of a commercial center including a convenience store, a fuel canopy with two underground storage tanks, a retail lease space, a quick service restaurant with drive-through, a car wash, restaurant, pharmacy, and a two-story retail building on an approximately 6.53-acre (284,884 sq. ft.) site. The project parcels are designated APN 0241-051-16, 0241-051-17, 0241-051-32, 0241- 051-02 and 0241-051-01. UltraSystems conducted a cultural resources study to evaluate the potential presence of prehistoric and historic resources within the project boundary. The project is located in central Fontana (Attachment A, Figure 1). The background research and archival study included a one-half-mile buffer surrounding the project site’s Area of Potential Effect (APE). In general, the project is located on vacant land bounded on the north by Baseline Avenue, beyond which is a health clinic, single-family residences, and a senior living facility (Sonrise Senior Citizen Villa); cattycorner to the northeast is the intersection of Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenue, across from which are commercial buildings and single-family residences; to the east is Sierra Avenue, across from which is an ARCO gas station and AMPM Convenience Store at the southeast corner of Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenue. In addition, there are single-family residences in the corridor between Sierra Avenue, Lake Lane, and Sleepy Creek; to the south is Montgomery Avenue, across from which are multi-family residences, and to the west is vacant land, beyond which are single-family residences, a religious building, and multi-family residential properties. 1.2 Project Description The Midland Plaza project is located on a 6.53-acre site bounded by Baseline Avenue to the north, Sierra Avenue to the east, and Montgomery Avenue to the south, in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County. The project site location is on the southwest corner of the Baseline Avenue/Sierra Avenue intersection (Attachment A, Figure 2). The site is currently undeveloped open space surrounded by single-family and multi-family, as well as a health clinic, senior living facility, commercial retail buildings, and a religious structure, including permanent all-weather roads and concrete sidewalks with landscaped medians. The proposed project would include the development of a commercial center as described above. The proposed project would also consist of utilities improvements, project site parking, and ornamental landscaping. Currently the project site is undeveloped. Regional access to the site is provided by the Foothill Freeway (Interstate 210) approximately two miles north at the Sierra Avenue interchange. The project is specifically located on the Fontana, Calif., USGS 7.5’ topographic quadrangle, Range 05 West, Township 01 South, in the NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 6. Area of Potential Effects The APE for the undertaking encompasses the maximum extent of ground disturbance required by the project design (see Attachment A, Figure 2 and Figure 3). The surface area of the APE is ❖ INTRODUCTION ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 1-2 September 2022 approximately 6.53 acres, with the entirety of this area subject to direct ground disturbances during construction. 1.3 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) Information Center. 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 if there were previous cultural resource surveys. The project site and a one-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. Stephen O’Neil, M.A.,RPA, the cultural resources manager at UltraSystems Environmental, qualifies as a Principal Prehistoric Archaeologist and Historic Archaeologist per United States Secretary of the Interior Standards (see Attachment B). Mr. O’Neil contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting a Sacred Lands File (SLF) Search and also asked for a list of interested local tribal organizations and potentially affiliated Native American individuals. The identified parties were contacted to comply with the requirement for outreach with Native American tribal organizations was conducted by Megan B. Doukakis, M.A. A cultural resources record search was request was sent to the SCCIC by Ms. Doukakis and conducted by their staff, and an intensive pedestrian cultural resources survey was conducted by Mr. O’Neil. A search of the Built Environmental Resource Directory provided by the Office of Historic Preservation (2021) for potential historic properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). was conducted for this project on September 29, 2022 by Megan Doukakis. 1.4 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. ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-1 September 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 a series of low rocky hills to the south. Temperatures in the region were much cooler and wetter throughout much of the Pleistocene Epoch. Today, the region’s environment is characterized by a temperate Mediterranean climate, with the average maximum temperature in July reaching 95 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) 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 topography is very flat with a slight slope to the south-southwest. The elevation at the southwest corner is just above 1,400 feet while a past USGS topo map indicated the elevation at the northeast corner is 1,415 feet. The project site boundary is underlain by Tujunga gravelly loamy sand (National Unit Symbol hcl2), which is formed from parent material of alluvium derived from granite. The soils are somewhat excessively drained with a depth to water table of more than 80 inches, and the slopes are 0 to 9 percent (USDA Web Soil Survey). The project site is located near the Lytle Creek alluvial fan 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, 1993, 1997). Additional sites with isolated Archaic dart points, bifaces, and other associated flaked stone artifacts are considered of 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 and McCarthy (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: ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-2 September 2022 • Paleoindian and Lake Mojave (Terminal Pleistocene and Early Holocene) (ca. 11000 to 6000 calibrated years [cal] B.C.). This 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 (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 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, however, is situated approximately five miles north of the Jurupa Hills in a flat, open alluvial plain that does not support the range of resources at the Jurupa Hills. 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 affiliated as an element of the Northern Takic Branch of that linguistic group (Golla, 2011). The Gabrielino, 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 Gabrielino cultural practices had declined before systematic ethnographic ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-3 September 2022 studies were instituted. Today, the leading sources on Gabrielino culture are Bean and Smith (1978a), Johnston (1962), and McCawley (1996). According to the 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 Gabrielino territory included the southern Channel Islands and the Los Angeles Basin. Their territory reached east into the present-day San Bernardino-Riverside area and south to the San Joaquin Hills in central Orange County. Different groups of Gabrielino adopted several subsistence strategies, based on gathering, hunting, and fishing. Because of the similarities to other Southern California tribes in economic activities, inland Gabrielino groups' industrial arts, exemplified by basket weaving, exhibited an affinity with those of their neighbors (Kroeber, 1925). Coastal Gabrielino 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 Gabrielino social organization are not well known. There appeared to have been at least three hierarchically ordered social classes, topped with an elite 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 was within the eastern Tongva culture area. The central Tongva lands was the Los Angeles Basin; 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 the Tongva consultant to researcher J.P. Harrington (McCawley, 1996:50). These hills likely correspond to the Jurupa hills lying five 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 Gabrielino to Mission San Gabriel. The first Franciscan establishment in Gabrielino 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 Gabrielino 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 Gabrielino were incorporated into Mission San Gabriel and other missions in Southern California (Engelhardt, 1931). Due to introduced diseases, dietary deficiencies, and forceful reduccion (removal of non-agrarian Native populations to the mission compound), Gabrielino ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-4 September 2022 population dwindled rapidly from these impacts. By 1900, the Gabrielino 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 Gabrielino 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. 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 ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-5 September 2022 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 the 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 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. During the post-WWII era, agriculture gave way to suburban development as residential neighborhoods and light industry gradually spread over former farmlands (NETR Online, 2018: 1959, 1966). 2.2.3.3 Project Site Land Use History Historic Aerial Photos Historic aerial photos are available for Fontana, the earliest dating to 1938 (NETROnline 2022: 1938, 1948, 1958). These maps indicate that the project area was used for orchard farming through 1958, after which time the area became developed with residential and commercial properties. Visible in the 1938 and 1948 photos (NETROnline 2022: 1938, 1948, 1958) are east-west oriented rows of eucalyptus trees that acted as windbreaks for the agricultural fields (orchards) along Baseline Avenue and Montgomery Avenue, as well as along Sierra Avenue which runs north-south on the east boundary of the project area. Baseline Avenue had been developed by 1938 as a permanent all-weather road. In the 1948 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 1948) the northeast quadrant of the project area, southwest of the intersection of Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenue appears to be developed with what appears to be a series of fruit packing warehouses. The 1959 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 1959) shows that the main portion of the subject property between Baseline Avenue and Montgomery Avenue along Sierra Avenue has been grubbed and graded and is developed with warehouse buildings on the northern half, while the southern half is primarily vacant land, leaving about one-quarter of the property on the west side that remains citrus groves. The 1966 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 1966) shows that the property is no longer occupied by citrus orchards and is largely vacant land with the exception of the former packing warehouses and what appears to be a single-family residence on Montgomery Avenue. The 1980 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 1980) shows that all but one of the packing warehouses has been demolished. The residential property on Montgomery Avenue appears to have been expanded for a multi-family residence, and to the west along Baseline Avenue are a series of small single-family residences. ❖ SETTING ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 2-6 September 2022 The 1985, 1994, 2002, 2009 aerial images (NETRonline 2022: 1985, 1994, 2002, 2009) indicate no significant changes to the subject property. The 2014 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 2014) also shows no discernable differences from the previous (1985-2009) aerial photos. The 2018 aerial image (NETRonline 2022: 2018) shows that the former multi-family residential property on Montgomery Avenue has been demolished, and the subject property is vacant land. Historic Topographic Maps Historic U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps for the Fontana, California 7.5’ Quadrangle were available for review on the USGS Store. The 1943 through 2018 topographic maps (USGS: 1943, 1955, 1967, 1973, 1980, 2018) indicate that the northern, eastern, and southern property boundary is aligned with Baseline Avenue, Sierra Avenue, and Montgomery Avenue, which are depicted as durable all-weather roads from 1943 onward. The 1943 topo map (USGS: 1943) has a spot elevation mark at the intersection of Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenue. Three structures are depicted on the subject property – one on Sierra Avenue and two on Montgomery Avenue. The 1955 topo map (USGS: 1955) indicates that both Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenue are secondary highways, and orchards are depicted on the west portion of the subject property, as well as east of Sierra Avenue, and south of Montgomery Avenue. There are now two structures along the central east edge of the parcel. This remains the case through the 1959, 1963 and 1965 topo maps. The 1969 topo map (USGS: 1969) shows that two structures on the eastern edge of the property are no longer present, and a structure has been added to the southern portion of the property on Montgomery Avenue. In addition, development is continuing north and east of the subject property with multiple structures depicted along Sierra Avenue and Baseline Avenue, as well as new structures and a church building to the west along Juniper Avenue. The 1973 topo map (USGS: 1973) shows that there are two new buildings rendered in pink on the southern portion of the property. In addition to the continued addition of new residential buildings in the surrounding area there are large commercial buildings constructed to the east of Sierra Avenue and southwest of Montgomery Avenue. The 1980 topo map (USGS: 1980) shows no discernible changes from the previous 1973 map, and the 2018 topo map (USGS: 2018) does not indicate features other than primary streets and elevation contours. Additional historical use information comes from the Environmental Information Form provided by the City of Fontana Planning Department (2021). This states that “it appears that from at least 1938 to 1960 the site had been used as orchards with associated small structures including a single family dwelling, garage, and sheds. A portion of the site was also used for car repairs from 1965 through 1970. The last remaining structures were demolished in 2014" (City of Fontan a 2021:3). ❖ RESEARCH METHODS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 3-1 September 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, as was a list of local Native American groups and individuals for outreach. Finally, a pedestrian cultural resource survey of the entire project area was conducted. 3.1 Records Search A cultural resource records search was requested on May 11, 2022, and was received August 8, 2022; the search was conducted by Isabella Kott, Assistant Coordinator. The archives were 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; Listed Properties and Determined Eligible Properties (2012), and the California Register of Historical Resources (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 2). The research effort assesses the sensitivity of the project site for both surface and subsurface cultural resources and assists in determining the potential to encounter such resources, especially prehistoric – i.e., Native American – cultural remains, during earth-moving activities associated with the undertaking. 3.2 Field Survey On June 14, 2022 and July 8, 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 May 27, 2022, Mr. O’Neil contacted the NAHC via email and facsimile 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 July 7, 2022, with a list of 18 tribal organizations and individuals to contact and letters to local tribes have been sent to them all (Attachment C). ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-1 September 2022 4.0 FINDINGS 4.1 Records Search 4.1.1 Recorded Archaeological Sites Based on the cultural resource records search, it was determined that one cultural resource (P-36- 010660) has been previously recorded within the project site boundary. Within the one-half - mile buffer zone, there has been one previously recorded historic-era cultural resource (P-36-010909). The historic site located on the parcel consists of a long, narrow concrete slab oriented east/west approximately 125 feet long by 25 feet wide; it is associated with a moderate scatter of historic and modern household refuse consisting primarily of glass and ceramic consumer items, along with a circa 1921-1942 red clay brick (Shepard 2002: 1 and 3). Based on a review of aerial photos and government maps, Shepard suggested the structure may have been present between 1941 and 1966 (ibid.: 4). Another survey of the project site in 2003 resulting in the additional recording a smaller concrete slab, measuring 44 feet long and 13 feet side located 16 feet south of the previously recorded larger concrete slab recorded by Shepard the year before (Chambers Group 2002:1). Further research conducted for the Continuation Sheet showed that in1938 there were only citrus trees present in the parcel, but by 1952 there was a complex of four long, rectangular, east/west oriented structures, and by 1969 no standing structures remained. Other records suggested the buildings were present by 1946 (Chambers Group 2003:1). The Continuation Sheet states that “As a result of its lack of historic significance, research potential, and integrity, the site is not recommended eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historic Resources, and avoidance during construction activities associated with widening of Sierra Avenue will not be necessary” (Chambers Group 2003:1) Table 4.1-1 summarizes these resources. Table 4.1-1 KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN A 1.0-MILE RADIUS OF THE APE Site Number Author(s) Date Type Description P-36-010660; CA-SBR- 10660H Shepard, Richard (Chambers Group) Anon. (Chambers Group) 2002 2003 Historic Historic period c1940s structure along Baseline and Sierra Avenues, Fontana, represented by two concrete slab foundations and a trash scatter. P-36-010909; CA-SBR- 10909H Mason, Roger D., and Cary D. Cotterman (Chambers Group). 2003 Historic Historic period structure along Baseline and Juniper Avenues, Fontana, represented by concrete slab foundations with three wings each with several rooms, an historic trash scatter consisting of debris, household goods and machinery, and landscaping. ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-2 September 2022 4.1.2 Previous Cultural Resource Investigations According to the records at the SCCIC, there was one previous survey report that included a portion of the project site (SB-02621). This was a general survey of the northern portion of the City of Fontana and did not record any cultural features in the project area (Alexandrowicz, et al. 1992). There have been an additional six cultural resource studies within the one-half-mile buffer of the project (Table 4.1-2) (See Attachment D). None of these studies recorded cultural resources in the project site. Table 4.1-2 KNOWN CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES WITHIN A 1.0-MILE RADIUS OF THE APE Report Number Author(s) Date Title Resources 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, 36-06811, 36-006812, 36-006813, 36-006814, 36-006815, 36-006816 SB-04250 White, Laurie S. 2000 Cultural Resources Assessment for AT&T Wireless Site #C570.2 (Baseline/Sierra), City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, Ca. 6PP NA SB-04253 Schmidt, James 2002 Baseline Deteriorated Pole Replacement (Pole #12455011E), San Bernardino County. NA SB-04872 Smallwood, Josh 2005 Historical / Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Fontana Promenade Specific Plan and EIR, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. 36-010658, 36-020648, 36-020649 SB-06787 Tang, Bai “Tom”, Deirdre Encarnación, and Daniel Ballester 2008 Historical / Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Chino Groundwater Basin Dry-Year Yield Program Expansion, Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino County, California. NA ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-3 September 2022 Report Number Author(s) Date Title Resources SB-07202 Wlodarski, Robert 2012 Record Search Results for the Proposed AT&T Wireless Telecommunications Site LAC570 (Baseline/ Sierra) Located at 7347 Juniper Avenue, Fontana, California. 36-010658, 36-010660, 36-010909, 36-015497 SB-00824 Simpson, Ruth 1983 Cultural Resources Assessment of Tentative Tract Map Number 11077, Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. NA Source: 4.2 Native American Outreach On May 27, 2022, Mr. O’Neil contacted the NAHC via email requesting a search of their SLF and asking for a list of local tribal organizations to contact. The results of the search request were received July 7, 2022, at the office of UltraSystems 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 competed for the information submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative [emphasis in the original].” (See Attachment C.) UltraSystems prepared letters to each of the 18 tribal contacts in the Commission’s list (Attachment C). On July 15, 2022, Mr. O’Neil mailed letters with accompanying maps to all 18 tribal contacts, and also emailed identical letters and maps to each of the 18 tribal contacts for which email addresses were known, 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. There have been five direct responses to date. Nicole A. Raslich, Archaeological Technician for the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians responded by email on July 15, 2022, indicating that the project area was not located within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. Therefore, they defer to the other tribes in the area. An acknowledgment of our email was also received from Laura Aviles on behalf of the Agua Caliente Band on July 15, 2022. Christina Conley, Tribal Consultant and Administrator for the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council responded by email on July 15, 2022, indicating that the tribe has no comment to that area as it reaches into their sister tribe’s land. Laura Chatterton. Cultural Resource Specialist for the Morongo Band of Mission Indians responded by email on September 9, 2022 indicating that the project area is within the tribe’s traditional use area and that the tribe wishes to be included in AB 52 consultation. Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer for the Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation responded by email on July 19, 2022 indicating that the tribe has no comments on this project and defers to the more local Tribes and supports their decisions on the project. Ryan Nordness, Cultural Resources Analyst for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, responded by email on July 26, 2022 indicating that the proposed project is not located near any known tribal cultural resources. Following up on the initial letter and email contacts, telephone calls were conducted by Megan B. Doukakis on September 14, 2022, to the eight tribal contacts who had not already responded to UltraSystems’ mailing and email. Two telephone calls were placed with no direct answer and so messages were left describing the project and requesting a response. These were to Sandonne Goad, ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-4 September 2022 Chairperson of the Gabrieleno / Tongva Nation and Wayne Walker, Co- Chairperson of the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians. In a call to Andrew Salas, Chairperson of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, the phone call was not answered, and a message could not be left due to the answering machine being full. In a call to Lovina Redner, Acting Chair of the Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians the tribal office receptionist indicated that the Chair was not in the office and that the best way to reach her is through email (which had already been done). In a call to Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson of the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, the phone line was disconnected. There have been no further responses to date from these tribes. During the telephone calls of September 14, 2022, Chairperson Anthony Morales of the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians stated that Baseline Road north of the project site has been a major route of travel with villages and water ways. According to Chairperson Morales, much of this area is natural landscape that has not been developed previously and is an area of concern. The Chairperson requested Native American and archaeological monitoring. He also requested that his tribe be included in monitoring. Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department for the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians stated that the tribe defers to San Manuel. Charles Alvarez, Chairperson of the Gabrieleno- Tongva Nation indicated that he has no comment on the project. (See Attachment C.) 4.3 Pedestrian Survey Results A pedestrian survey was conducted by Mr. O’Neil on June 14, 2022 and July 8, 2022. The survey consisted of walking, visually inspecting and photographing the exposed ground surface of the project site using standard archaeological procedures and techniques. On June 14, 2022 a segment of the project site was surveyed on the southwest corner, consisting of approximately 25,600 square feet along Montgomery Avenue. The remainder of the parcel, the main portion of the site consisting of approximate 272,800 square feet at the southwest corner of Baseline Avenue and Sierra Avenues (Figure 4.3-1), was surveyed on July 8, 2022. Both areas of the project site were bordered with a chain-link fence. The smaller segment had a gate opening on the south off of Montgomery Avenue that allowed access. On both days the weather conditions consisted of a clear sky, with morning temperatures in the low 70s °F and reaching the mid-80s °F in the afternoon. The project parcel consists of open flat land with no structures or hardscape. Survey of the ground surface was conducted in north-south transects 10 meters apart. Transects in the smaller, southwest segment were started in the northwest corner, walking south, and upon reaching the south edge of the parcel shifting 10 meters to the east and walking north, repeating this pattern until the entire segment had been surveyed. Likewise surveying in the main portion of the site transects were conducted in the same manner until the entire segment had been surveyed to the edge of Sierra Avenue. ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-1 September 2022 Figure 4.3-1 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL ALONG MONTGOMERY AVENUE; VIEW TO THE NORTHEAST The soil was fine grain brown soil without sand or gravel (which is more common in northern Fontana) with numerous small (2-4 inches diameter) rocks and some large rocks (6-9 inches diameter) (Figure 4.3-2). The southwest segment had three clusters of boulders that had been collected into the northwest and southwest corners. The parcel had been plowed in north/south lines for weed control. Vegetation present consisted of widely spaced non-native plants including tumble weeds (Russian thistle), bur clover, young mustard and dried wild oats, mostly along the east side of the parcel; there was also a native sunflower (Helianthus annus). Throughout the parcel were occasional burrows used by a medium sized animal consistent with rabbit dens (or even coyote); also, small burrows consistent with an animal the size of a large lizard. The only direct evidence of animals was a single dog (Canis familiaris) skull, a small right jaw fragment possibly of a small dog or fox; there was also a bird kill site indicating the preened of both pigeons and raptors. ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-1 September 2022 Figure 4.3-2 GROUND SURFACE AND PLOW LINES; VIEW TO THE NORTH In the southeast area of the northeast quadrant of the parcel, relatively close to Sierra Avenue within 35 feet of the current street edge, four foundations of concrete were observed. The two to the north consisted of a long rectangular concrete slab (Feature A) with a smaller L-shaped concrete slab (Feature B) off the northeast corner (Figure 4.3-3). To the south of Features A and B there is a larger (both in length and width) concrete foundation slab (Feature C) that also has an accompanying smaller rectangular slab (Feature D) off of the southeast corner. Feature A is approximately 25 feet by 125 feet (3,125 square feet), Feature B is approximately 17 feet by 21.5 feet (365.5 square feet), Feature C is approximately 25 feet by 195 feet (4,875 square feet) (Figure 4.3-4) and Feature D is approximately 13.5 feet by 26 feet (351 square feet) in size (Figure 4.3-5). Features A and B are the same as recorded by Richard Shepard during a 2002 survey of the parcel as CA-SBR-10660H (2002; Chambers Group 2003), who suggested they were associated with the orchard operations here in the 1940s through 1960s. Features C and D are similar is configuration and materials as the other two. They also are believed to be associated with the prior orchard operations at the site. The light scatter of historic trash and debris found surrounding Features A and B by Shepard was also observed during this survey extending to the west of Features C and D. This consisted of widely scattered concrete and red brick fragments, as well as household items such as a glass window pane fragment, a white glass jar fragment, a plastic doll head, and a small clear medicine bottle. These four features can be ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-2 September 2022 Figure 4.3-3 FEATURES A AND B (CA-SBR-10660h) IN FOREGROUND; VIEW TO THE SOUTH ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-3 September 2022 Figure 4.3-4 FEATURE B, SIERRA AVENUE IN BACKGROUND; VIEW TO THE EAST ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-4 September 2022 Figure 4.3-5 EAST END OF FEATURE C (FOREGROUND) AND D (BEHIND), SIERRA AVENUE TO LEFT; VIEW TO SOUTH seen on the project location map (Attachment A, Figure 2). A site record Continuation Sheet to CA- SBR-10660H is being prepared for Features C and D. Other structures seen on the current Fontana , California 7.5’ USGS topo map in the southwest corner of the project were not present, and no foundations or debris was observed in that location. 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). The project site has been surficially disturbed by previous agricultural use as an orchard (see Section 2.2.3.3 above on historic use). Photographs of the project site were taken during the cultural resources survey. The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for prehistoric cultural resources. The survey did observe the two previously recorded concrete foundations identified with CA-SBR-10660H. The survey also observed and recorded two further concrete foundation slabs here identified as Features C and D; they will be recorded as part of CA-SBR-10660H on a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Continuation Sheet. (See Attachment E.) Like CA-SBR-10660H (Chambers Group 2003:1), Features C and D are not regarded as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) nor the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-5 September 2022 4.4 National Register of Historic Places A search of the Built Environmental Resource Directory (BERD) provided by the Office of Historic Preservation (2021) was conducted for this project on September 29, 2022. It was determined that the project area does not have any resources present that have been evaluated under the National Register (Built Environmental Resource Directory). The closest properties that have been evaluated are two single family residences (36-015292 and 36- 015294) located at 7407 Mango Avenue and 7518 Mango Avenue. Both are located less than 0.30 miles to the southeast of the project area and determined ineligible for the National Register by consensus through the Section 106 process (6Y). They have not been evaluated for the California Register or for local listing. Seven additional resources were noted in the BERD as being located in the half-mile radius of the project boundary (see Table 4.4-1). Table 4.4-1 BUILT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE DIRECTORY RESOURCES WITHIN A HALF-MILE RADIUS OF THE PROJECT BOUNDARY Primary#/Pro p# Address Evaluation Evaluation Description Distance to Project Area 162766 7727 Juniper Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.44 miles to the southwest 36- 015292/11385 0 7407 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.28 miles to the east 36-015293/ 113849 7497 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.32 miles to the southeast 36-015294/ 113848 7518 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.29 miles to the southeast 36-015295/ 113847 7593 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.38 miles to the southeast 36-015296/ 113846 7609 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.39 miles to the southeast ❖ FINDINGS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 4-6 September 2022 Primary#/Pro p# Address Evaluation Evaluation Description Distance to Project Area 36-015297/ 113845 7631 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.42 miles to the southeast 36-015298/ 113844 7645 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.42 miles to the southeast 36-015299/ 113843 7725 Mango Avenue 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or local listing. 0.50 miles to the southeast Source: ❖ MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 5-1 September 2022 5.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Site Evaluation Criteria An evaluation of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) uses criteria found in eligibility descriptions from the California Register of Historical Resources (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 listed cultural resources will be adversely affected by the project. Historical resource CA-SBR- 1066H is not regarded as eligible for listing on the NRHP nor the CRHR. 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 called to assess the finds. ❖ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 6-1 September 2022 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS No prehistoric archaeologic resources were identified during the pedestrian field survey of the project. No prehistoric resources were identified in the project site through the SCCIC records search. However, there is one historic resource that was listed with the SCCIC and was observed during the pedestrian field survey. The Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians stated that there were traditional trade routes along what is now Baseline Road to the north of the project site. The Band requested that both archaeological and Native American monitors be present during construction excavation. (See Section 4.2 and Attachment C.) This initial cultural resources study findings suggest that there is a low potential for finding prehistoric resources. However, due concerns over the potential for prehistoric cultural resources to be present, as stated by the San Gabriel Band, they expressed the wish that both archaeological and Native American monitors be present at all ground-disturbing activities during project construction. (See Section 4.2 and Attachment C.) The presence of remnants of historic structures and surrounding scattered debris and household trash suggest the strong potential for further related historic resource below the ground surface. It is recommended that an archaeological monitor be present during all ground-disturbing activities, and grading and trenching into native soil. 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. 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). The agriculturally fallow nature of the project site and level elevation relative to adjacent roads suggests that ground here has been minimally disturbed, with the native surface soil remaining. The results of the pedestrian assessment indicate that there are historic properties present (CA-SBR- 10660H, which consist of four concrete foundations of past farm-related structures, as well as widely scattered debris and household trash associated with the structures). However, it has been determined that these features are not regarded as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) nor the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), and therefore their demolition during project construction would not result in an adverse effect. There is the potential for the present of intact household trash deposits associated with the farm structures. ❖ REFERENCES ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 7-1 September 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. (SB 02621.) Archaeological Consulting Services Technical Series No. 2. Prepared by: On file at South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. Anicic, John Charles, Jr. 2005 Images of America: Fontana. Arcadia Publishing, San Francisco and Chicago. 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. Chambers Group, Inc. 2003 Continuation Sheet (CA-SBR-10660H). On file at South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. Chartkoff, Joseph L., and Kerry Kona Chartkoff 1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. City of Fontana Planning Department 2021 Environmental Information Form; Project Title: Midland Plaza. Revised October 2021. Planning Department, City of Fontana, 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 ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 7-2 September 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. Johnston, Bernice E. 1962 California’s Gabrielino Indians. Southwest Museum, Los Angeles. 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. 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. 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. ❖ REFERENCES ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Page 7-3 September 2022 NETR Online 2022 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity, taken in 1938, 1948, 1959, 1966, 1980, 1985, 1994, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2018. http://www.historicaerials.com. Accessed August 22, 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. Shepard, Richard 2002 Primary Record, CA-SBR-10660H (CG/SB-3). On file at South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2022 USGS Historic Topographic Map Explorer. Topographic maps developed in 1943, 1953, 1967, 1973, 1980 and 2018. Electronically accessed August 22, 2022. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/. Warren, Claude N. 1984 The Desert Region. In Michael J. Moratto (ed.), California Archaeology, pp. 339-430. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida. ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project September 2022 ATTACHMENTS ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project September 2022 ATTACHMENT A PROJECT MAPS ❖ ATTACHMENTS❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment A, Page 1 September 2022 Figure 1 PROJECT REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ❖ ATTACHMENTS❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment A, Page 2 September 2022 Figure 2 PROJECT STUDY AREA ❖ ATTACHMENTS❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment A, Page 3 September 2022 Figure 3 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WITH APE SHOWN ❖ ATTACHMENTS❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project September 2022 ATTACHMENT B PERSONNEL BACKGROUND ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 1 September 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. 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. ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 2 September 2022 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 Native American Heritage Commission 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 ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 3 September 2022 Megan B. Doukakis Archaeological Technician Education ▪ M.A. Public Archaeology, California State University, Northridge, 2019 ▪ 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 Ms. Black has worked in the field of cultural resource management for five years at environmental firms. Before this Ms. Black had participated in multiple field schools in Southern California and abroad. She has experience in survey, excavation, laboratory work, and information searches. Ms. Black 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 Ms. Black 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. Ms. Black 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 Ms. Black 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. 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 Ms. Black 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 ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 4 September 2022 with this construction was made for the City of Lake Forest. Ms. Black 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. Ms. Black 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, Ms. Black 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. Ms. Black 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 Ms. Black 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. Ms. Black 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. Ms. Black 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 Ms. Black was an archaeological monitor for this project. She monitored all ground disturbing activities as well as lightly surveying the area for cultural material. Ms. Black also conducted the records center research at the South Central Coastal Information Center at CSUF. Through email, letter, and telephone correspondence, Ms. Black contacted the NAHC and associated tribal groups. ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 5 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENTS ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment B, Page 6 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project September 2022 ATTACHMENT C Native American Heritage Commission Records Search and Native American Contacts ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 1 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 2 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 3 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 4 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 5 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 6 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 7 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 8 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 9 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 10 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 11 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 12 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 13 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 14 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 15 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 16 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 17 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 18 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 19 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 20 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 21 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 22 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 23 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 0 September 2022 Midland Plaza Project; City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. [UltraSystems (UEI) Project #7178] Native American Contact Log Name Tribe/Affiliation Letter Contacts E-mail Contacts Telephone Contacts Comments Andrew Green, Asst. Government Program Analyst Native American Heritage Commission N/A May 27, 2022; July 7, 2022 N/A Request for Sacred Lands File search and local Native American representatives contact information. Response received July 7, 2022. Reid Milanovich, Chairperson Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email response received from Nicole A. Raslich, Archaeological Technician for the tribe on July 15, 2022, indicating that the project area was not located within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. Therefore, they defer to the other tribes in the area. An acknowledgment of our email was also received from Laura Aviles on July 15, 2022. Patricia Garcia- Plotkin, THPO Director Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email response received from Nicole A. Raslich, Archaeological Technician for the tribe on July 15, 2022, indicating that the project area was not located within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area. Therefore, they defer to the other tribes in the area. Andrew Salas, Chairperson Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. A phone call was made on September 14, 2022 and there was no answer, and the mailbox was full so no message could be left. No response to date. Anthony Morales, Chairperson Gabrieleno / Tongva San July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent June 15, ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 1 September 2022 Name Tribe/Affiliation Letter Contacts E-mail Contacts Telephone Contacts Comments Gabriel Band of Mission Indians 2022. A phone call was made on September 14, 2022, during which Chairperson Morales indicated that Baseline Road was a major route of travel with villages and water ways. Much of this area is natural landscape that has not been developed previously. This is an area of concern. The Chairperson requested Native American and Archaeological monitoring. He also requested that his tribe be included in monitoring. Sandonne Goad, Chairperson Gabrieleno / Tongva Nation July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. A phone call was made on September 14, 2022, there was no answer, and a message was left. No response to date. Christina Conley, Tribal Consultant and Administrat or Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15 2022. An email response was received on July 15, 2022 from Ms. Conley, indicating that the tribe has no comment to that area as it reaches into their sister tribe’s land. Robert Dorame, Chairperson Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email response was received on July 15, 2022 from Ms. Conley – see above. Charles Alvarez, Chairperson Gabrieleno- Tongva Nation July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. A phone call was made on September 14, 2022 and the Chairperson indicated that he has no comment on the project. ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 2 September 2022 Name Tribe/Affiliation Letter Contacts E-mail Contacts Telephone Contacts Comments Ann Brierty, THPO Morongo Band of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email response with letter attached was received on September 9, 2022 from Laura Chatterton. Cultural Resource Specialist for the tribe indicating that the project area is within the tribe’s traditional use area and that the tribe wishes to be included in AB 52 consultation. Robert Martin, Chairperson Morongo Band of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent June 15, 2022. Email response was received September 9, 2022 from Ms. Chatterton – see above. Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email response was received July 19, 2022 from Ms. McCormick, who indicated that they have no comments on this project and defer to the more local Tribes and support their decisions on the project. Manfred Scott, Acting Chairman Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent June 15, 2022. Email response was received June 20, 2022 from Ms. McCormick – see above. Jessica Mauck, Director of Cultural Resources San Manuel Band of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 N/A Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. An email was received from Ryan Nordness, Cultural Resources Analyst on July 26, 2022, indicating that the proposed project is not located near any known tribal cultural resources. Lovina Redner, Acting Chair Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. A phone call was made ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 3 September 2022 Name Tribe/Affiliation Letter Contacts E-mail Contacts Telephone Contacts Comments on September 14, 2022 the receptionist indicated that the Chair was not in and the best way to reach her is through email. No response to date. Mark Cochrane, Co- Chairperson Serrano Nation of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. A phone call was made on September 14, 2022, but the line was disconnected. Wayne Walker, Co- Chairperson Serrano Nation of Mission Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent July 15, 2022. Phone call was made on September 14, 2022, there was no answer, and a message was left. No response to date. Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent June 15, 2022. A phone call was made on June 29, 2022, during which Mr. Ontiveros indicated that the tribe defers to San Manuel. Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians July 15, 2022 July 15, 2022 September 14, 2022 Letter and email describing project and requesting input on concerns was sent June 15, 2022. A phone call was made on June 29, 2022 o see above. ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 4 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 5 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 6 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 7 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 8 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 9 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 10 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 11 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment C, Page 12 September 2022 ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project September 2022 ATTACHMENT D CHRIS Records Search Bibliography ❖ ATTACHMENT ❖ 7178/Midland Plaza Project Attachment D, Page 1 September 2022