Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C_Archaelogical Resources Assessment March 8, 2023 15031 Lonnie P. Nadal Shubin Nadal Realty Investors PSIF SN Industry Avenue LLC 901 Dove Street, Suite 225 Newport Beach, California 92660 Subject: Draft Archaeological Resources Assessment for the 11700 Industry Avenue Building Warehouse Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California Dear Mr. Lonnie P. Nadal: This letter documents the archaeological resources assessment conducted by Dudek for the 11700 Industry Avenue Building Warehouse Project (proposed Project), located within the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The present study documents the results of a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), an archaeological pedestrian survey, an analysis regarding the potential for archaeological resources to be present, as well as management recommendations. The City of Fontana (City) is the lead agency responsible for compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Project Location The proposed Project site is located within the southwestern portion of the City of Fontana, in southwestern San Bernardino County, California and is located within public land survey system (PLSS) Section 33 of Township 1 South, Range 6 West on the Guasti, California 7.5-minute USGS Quadrangle (Appendix A: Figure 1). Specifically, the rectangular-shaped approximately 6-acre proposed Project site consists of one (1) parcel (Assessor Parcel Number [APNs] 023-817-137) and is addressed as 11700 Industry Avenue. The proposed Project site is immediately bounded by a two-story warehouse to the north, Industry Avenue to the east, a developed property with manufacturing to the south, and South Etiwanda Avenue to the west (Appendix A: Figure 2). Project Description The proposed Project includes construction of a one-story, 122,000 square-foot warehouse. The building would have a maximum height of 60 feet above ground surface. The building would include a 3,000 square-foot ground floor office and 3,000 square-foot mezzanine, with a building footprint of 119,000 square feet. The building would be located in the center of the proposed Project site, with paved parking lots, a truck court, loading areas, and landscaping surrounding it. A driveway would be located along the perimeter of the building, providing access from Industry Avenue to two of the parking lots. Along the southern side of the proposed Project site would be the truck court and has 18 dock doors and one (1) grade level door. The site plan accommodates parking stalls for, including TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 2 MARCH 2023 trailer parking stalls, which has a secured yard and gate that would block traffic between the truck court and the eastern portion of the parking lot, which provides entrance to the site off of Industry Avenue. The areas not developed with the warehouse, parking lots, and truck court would be landscaped, resulting in a total of 32,420 square feet of landscaped area on the proposed Project site. Site Access and Parking Access to the proposed Project site would be provided by one driveway on Industry Avenue. This driveway would be a 40-foot-wide truck driveway at the southeastern corner of the proposed Project site along Industry Avenue, providing access to the proposed vehicle parking lot and truck court. Vehicle parking for employees would be located in a parking lot along the east side of the proposed Project site, a parking lot in the southeastern corner of the proposed Project site, and a parking lot in the southwestern corner of the proposed Project site. Gated entry to the truck court would be provided to the northeast truck court. Overall, parking would consist of 69 parking stalls and five (5) trailer parking stalls. On-Site and Off-Site Adjacent Improvements The proposed Project would also include improvements to Industry Avenue along the proposed Project’s street frontages, including a 4-foot public sidewalk dedication and sidewalk improvements, a railway easement to be quitclaimed along the western side of the proposed Project site, a 10-foot landscape setback, and half-width frontage improvements within the roadway right-of-way. Consistent with City standards, all existing overhead utility service lines adjoining and interior to the proposed Project site would be undergrounded, and new City streetlights would be installed within the dedicated right-of-way. A variety of trees, shrubs, plants, and land covers would be planted in the landscape areas throughout the proposed Project site. Utility and Infrastructure Improvements The proposed Project site is currently developed and served by some existing utilities, including domestic water, natural gas, and electricity. However, in some instances, these present utilities are not adequately sized to serve the proposed Project and, thus, will be upgraded/replaced during Project construction. As such, lateral water lines would be constructed as part of the proposed Project and connect to the existing water line within Industry Avenue to provide adequate domestic water service and fire flow. Similarly, lateral sewer lines would be extended to the proposed Project site from the existing sewer main. An 8-inch sewer main extension would be construction within the Industry Avenue right-of-way, and a 6-inch sewer line would be constructed from the sewer main extension to the proposed Project site. As part of the proposed Project, a new engineered storm drain system will be constructed on the proposed Project site to collect and treat on-site stormwater runoff. On-site stormwater will be collected via a series of inlets and catch basins before being conveyed to an on-site underground infiltration basin located beneath the truck court. The infiltration basin would allow a certain amount of stormwater to infiltrate into the soils, and excess flows would then flow into the City’s storm drain system. Current Project design indicates that the depths of ground disturbance across the proposed Project is between 3 to 4 feet below the existing ground surface with a maximum depth of disturbance of 14 feet below existing ground surface. TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 3 MARCH 2023 Environmental Setting The proposed Project site is within California’s Transverse Ranges geomorphic province, which is defined by an east-west trending series of steep mountain ranges and valleys (California Geological Survey 2002). The transverse ranges include the Santa Ana Mountains to the southwest, the San Jacinto Mountains to the southeast, and the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains to the north. The proposed Project site is approximately 9 miles south of the San Bernardino, approximately 14 miles southwest of the San Gabriel Mountains, approximately 11 miles northeast of the Santa Ana Mountains. The Jurupa Hills are located approximately 1 mile southeast of the proposed Project site. The proposed Project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvial fan deposits originating from the Lytle Creek fan. More specifically, the proposed Project site is situated on an alluvial plain flowing southward from the confluence of Lytle Creek Wash and the Cajon Wash. In addition, the proposed Project site is approximately 5 miles north of the Santa Ana River channel, over 14 miles north of Lake Matthews and approximately 20 miles northwest of Lake Perris. The natural vegetation within the Project vicinity prior to European colonization would have consisted of various native plants like sand verbena, yarrow, and deerweed, as well as manzanita, and other perennial grasses and herbs (Calflora 2022). According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2023a), soils within the proposed Project site consists of Tujunga loamy sand with 0 to 5 percent slopes. This soils series is described below according the official soil description (USDA 2023b): Tujunga Series: Characterized as very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils that formed in alluvium from granitic sources. This soils series is found on alluvial fans and floodplains, including urban areas and consists of slopes ranging from 0 to 12 percent. A typical Tujunga series pedon extends approximately 6.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Presently, the proposed Project is contains general industrial land uses developed with a tall metal warehouse building (approximately 108,000 square feet), a building supply store, and parking, provided adjacent to Industry Avenue. A repair business occupies a large portion of the building, while a building supply store occupies the remaining area in the building. The proposed Project site also includes several storage buildings, parked deliver trucks and sheds. The remainder of the proposed Project site consists of paved parking areas, various hardscape features, and paved driveways and parking areas. The proposed Project site is relatively flat with elevation ranging from 861 to 874 feet above mean sea level (AMSL), sloping gently to the southwest (Google 2023). Surrounding land uses include a mix of urbanized land uses primarily related to industrial operations. Regulatory Context Work for this Project was conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The regulatory framework as it pertains to cultural resources under CEQA is detailed below. Under the provisions of CEQA, including the CEQA Statutes (PRC Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1), the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15064.5), and California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5024.1 (14 CCR 4850 et seq.), properties expected to be directly or indirectly affected by a proposed project must be evaluated for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility (PRC Section 5024.1). TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 4 MARCH 2023 The purpose of the CRHR is to maintain listings of the state’s historical resources and to indicate which properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from material impairment and substantial adverse change. The term historical resources include a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR; a resource included in a local register of historical resources; and any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (14 CCR 15064.5[a]). The criteria for listing properties in the CRHR were developed in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The California Office of Historic Preservation regards “any physical evidence of human activities over 45 years old” as meriting recordation and evaluation (OHP 1995:2). State The California Register of Historical Resources A cultural resource is considered “historically significant” under CEQA if the resource meets one or more of the criteria for listing on the CRHR. The CRHR was designed to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify existing cultural resources within the state and to indicate which of those resources should be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change. The following criteria have been established for the CRHR. A resource is considered significant if it: 1. is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 2. is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3. 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 values; or 4. has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be able to convey the reasons for their significance. Such integrity is evaluated in regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Under CEQA, if an archeological site is not a historical resource but meets the definition of a “unique archeological resource” as defined in PRC Section 21083.2, then it should be treated in accordance with the provisions of that section. A unique archaeological resource is defined as follows: • An archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: o Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; o Has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or o Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. Resources that neither meet any of these criteria for listing in the CRHR nor qualify as a “unique archaeological resource” under CEQA (PRC Section 21083.2) are viewed as not significant. Under CEQA, “A non-unique TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 5 MARCH 2023 archaeological resource need be given no further consideration, other than the simple recording of its existence by the lead agency if it so elects” (PRC Section 21083.2[h]). Impacts that adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to historical resources from a proposed project are thus considered significant if the project (1) physically destroys or damages all or part of a resource; (2) changes the character of the use of the resource or physical feature within the setting of the resource, which contributes to its significance; or (3) introduces visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of significant features of the resource. California Environmental Quality Act As described further, the following CEQA statutes (PRC Section 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) are of relevance to the analysis of archaeological, historic, and tribal cultural resources: ▪ PRC Section 21083.2(g) defines “unique archaeological resource.” ▪ PRC Section 21084.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) defines “historical resources.” In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b) defines the phrase “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource;” it also defines the circumstances when a project would materially impair the significance of a historical resource. ▪ PRC Section 21074(a) defines “tribal cultural resources.” ▪ PRC Section 5097.98 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) set forth standards and steps to be employed following the accidental discovery of human remains in any location other than a dedicated ceremony. ▪ PRC Sections 21083.2(b) and 21083.2(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 provide information regarding the mitigation framework for archaeological and historic resources, including examples of preservation-in-place mitigation measures. Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to significant archaeological sites because it maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context and may also help avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the archaeological site(s). More specifically, under CEQA, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it may cause “a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” (PRC Section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)). If a site is listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or included in a local register of historic resources, or identified as significant in a historical resources survey (meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(q)), it is an “historical resource” and is presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of CEQA (PRC Section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)). The lead agency is not precluded from determining that a resource is a historical resource even if it does not fall within this presumption (PRC Section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)). A “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” reflecting a significant effect under CEQA means “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1); PRC Section 5020.1(q)). In turn, the significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project does any of the following: TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 6 MARCH 2023 (1) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register; or (2) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the PRC or its identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the PRC, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or (3) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(2)). Pursuant to these sections, the CEQA inquiry begins with evaluating whether a project site contains any “historical resources,” then evaluates whether that project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource such that the resource’s historical significance is materially impaired. If it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that they cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Sections 21083.2(a)–(c)). Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: (1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. (2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type. (3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC Section 21083.2(g)). Impacts on nonunique archaeological resources are generally not considered a significant environmental impact (PRC Section 21083.2(a); CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c)(4)). However, if a nonunique archaeological resource qualifies as a TCR (PRC Sections 21074(c) and 21083.2(h)), further consideration of significant impacts is required. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 assigns special importance to human remains and specifies procedures to be used when Native American remains are discovered. As described below, these procedures are detailed in PRC Section 5097.98. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 7 MARCH 2023 no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains shall occur until the county coroner has examined the remains (Section 7050.5(b)). PRC Section 5097.98 also outlines the process to be followed in the event that remains are discovered. If the coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must contact NAHC within 24 hours (Section 7050.5(c)). NAHC will notify the “most likely descendant.” With the permission of the landowner, the most likely descendant may inspect the site of discovery. The inspection must be completed within 48 hours of notification of the most likely descendant by NAHC. The most likely descendant may recommend means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and items associated with Native Americans. Local City of Fontana Historic Resource Code (ARTICLE XIII.) Sec. 5-351. - Purpose. This article is adopted to implement the goals and policies of the general plan, which recognize the presence of archeological sites and buildings that have historic importance for the city. The city council finds and declares that historic, archeological and cultural resources symbolize the city and its people, reveal how the city's character was shaped, and instill pride in the community. The creation and functions of the planning commission and the identification, preservation and protection of historic, archeological and cultural resources within the city shall be governed by the provisions of this article. (Ord. No. 1001, § 1(8-68), 1-2-91; Ord. No. 1244, § 3, 5-5-98). Sec. 5-355. - Historical Resources Designation Criteria. The city council, upon recommendation of the commission, may designate any improvement, natural feature or site as an historical resource and any area within the city as an historic overlay district if it meets the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or the following: 1) It has a special historical, archeological, cultural, architectural, community or aesthetic value; 2) It is identified with persons, a business use or events significant in local, state or national history; 3) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; 4) It has a unique location or singular physical characteristic that represents an established and familiar visible feature of a neighborhood or community or the city; 5) Its integrity as a natural environment or feature strongly contributes to the well-being of residents or a neighborhood of the city; or 6) It is a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures or objects that are unified by past events or are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development.(Ord. No. 1001, § 1(8-72), 1-2-91; Ord. No. 1244, § 3, 5-5-98). TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 8 MARCH 2023 Sec. 5-356. - Historical Resources Designation Procedures. The city council may designate historical resources and historical overlay districts in the following manner: 1) Application. Any person may request the designation of an historical resource or an historic overlay district by submitting a request for such designation at the public counter. Such request shall be forwarded to the commission. The city council may also initiate designation proceedings on its own motion. The historic preservation commission may also initiate designation proceedings on its own motion during its first meeting of each calendar year. Request for designation of an historical resource or overlay district shall contain sufficient documentation and information to indicate how the proposed historical resource or historic overlay district meets the designation criteria set forth in this article. Notification of the request shall, within 30 days of receipt of the request, be sent to the owners and occupants of the subject property, using the names and addresses of such owners as shown on the latest equalized assessment rolls. 2) Review of request. The commission shall conduct a study of the proposed designation by verifying the accuracy of the information supplied with the request, reviewing other documentation, visiting the site, or taking such other actions as it deems appropriate. If the commission determines that the request merits consideration, it shall schedule a public hearing. Notice of the commission's decision to schedule or not schedule a public hearing shall be mailed to the person making the request for designation. 3) Public hearing. If the commission decides to schedule a public hearing, notice of the date, place, time and purpose of the hearing shall be given by first class mail to the person requesting designation and the owners and occupants of the subject property at least ten days prior to the date of the public hearing, using the names and addresses of such owners as shown on the latest equalized assessment rolls. The hearing shall also be advertised once in a newspaper of local circulation. 4) Restriction on issuance of permits. No permits for building, alteration, demolition or removal of any improvement, building or structure of a proposed historical resource or historic overlay district shall be issued while the public hearing or any related appeal is pending. 5) Commission recommendation. At the conclusion of the public hearing, but in no event more than 30 days from the date set for the initial public hearing, the commission shall recommend, in writing, approval or disapproval, in whole or in part, of the request for designation. The commission's recommendation shall include findings of fact relating to the criteria for designation set forth in this article. In the case of a proposed historical resource, the commission's recommendation shall be transmitted directly to the city council. In the case of a proposed historic overlay district, the recommendation of the commission shall follow the city development code zoning procedures regarding the establishment of an historic overlay district in its recommendation to the city council. The recommendation shall also be sent to the person requesting designation and the owners and occupants of the subject property. 6) Council decision. Within 30 days from the date of receipt of the recommendation from the commission, the city council shall by ordinance approve or disapprove, in whole or in part, the request for designation. As soon thereafter as reasonably practical, the community development department shall send by first class mail a copy of the ordinance to the owners and occupants of the subject property, using the names and addresses of such owners as shown on the latest equalized assessment rolls. TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 9 MARCH 2023 7) Failure to notify. Failure to send any notice by mail to any property owner where the address of such owner is not a matter of public record shall not invalidate any proceedings in connection with the proposed designation. 8) Removal of designation. The commission shall not recommend that a resource or district be removed from the local register of all properties designated as historical resources or historic overlay districts unless it is discovered that the city council in making the original designation was erroneous or false or that circumstances wholly beyond the owner's control have rendered the resource ineligible for designation based on the criteria set forth in this article and that it would be feasible to restore the resource. 9) Recording. Designations must be recorded with the county recorder's office. (Ord. No. 1001, § 1(8-73), 1- 2-91; Ord. No. 1111, § 4, 5-3-94; Ord. No. 1244, § 3, 5-5-98). Background Research SCCIC Records Search On January 30, 2023, Dudek conducted a search of the CHRIS at the SCCIC located at the California State University, Fullerton. This records search included previously recorded cultural resources and investigations conducted within a 0.5-mile radius of the proposed Project site as well as their collections of mapped prehistoric and historic archaeological resources; Department of Parks and Recreation site records; technical reports; archival resources; and ethnographic references. Additional consulted sources included historical maps of the project site, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), the California Historic Property Data File, and the lists of California State Historical Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, and the Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility. Dudek reviewed the SCCIC records to determine whether the implementation of the proposed Project would have the potential to impact any known and unknown cultural resources. The confidential CHRIS records search results are provided in Confidential Appendix B. Previously Conducted Cultural Resource Studies Results of the cultural resources records search indicate that eight (8) cultural resource studies have been conducted within a 0.5-mile radius of the proposed Project site between 1976 and 2008. Of these previous studies, one report (SB-00447) overlaps the entirety (100 percent) of the proposed Project site; however, the study focused on water rights and did not address cultural resources within the area of study, including the present proposed Project site. This suggests that the entirety of the proposed Project site has not been subject to any previous archaeological investigations. Table 1, below, summarizes all eight (8) previous studies. TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 10 MARCH 2023 Table 1. Previous Technical Studies Within a 0.5-Mile of the Proposed Project Site SCCIC Report No. Authors Year Title Proximity to Proposed Project Site SB-00401 Hearn, Joseph E. 1976 Archaeological - Historical Resources Assessment of San Sevaine Flood Control Channel From Marlay Avenue to Riverside County Line in the Fontana Area Outside SB-00447 Scott, M. B. 1976 Development of Water Facilities in the Santa Ana River Basin, California, 1810- 1968 Overlaps SB-00644 Leonard III, N. Nelson 1978 Archaeological Evaluation of the Proposed Fontana Interceptor Outside SB-04159 Duke, Curt 2001 Cultural Resource Assessment : Cingular Wireless Facility No. SB137-01, San Bernardino County, CA. 5PP Outside SB-04164 Budinger, Fred E. 2001 Verizon Site F045 Etiwanda. 11PP Outside SB-04265 Strickland, Jan 2002 D131.2-Etiwanda/Jurupa. 15PP Outside SB-05420 Tang, Bai "Tom", Laurie Taylor, and Daniel Ballester 2006 Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties: Revised Wineville Recycled Water Pipeline in the Cities of Ontario and Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Outside SB-05973 Encarnacion, Deirdre, Harry M. Quinn, Daniel Ballester, and Laura H. Shaker 2008 Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties: Fontana-3 Pipeline Laterals Recycled Water Pipeline Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Outside Previously Recorded Cultural Resources The SCCIC records indicate that no cultural resources have been previously recorded within 0.5-mile of the proposed Project site. Review of Historical Topographical Maps and Aerial Photographs Dudek consulted historical topographic maps and aerial photographs through the Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR) and the USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer (USGS), to better understand any natural or human-made changes to the proposed Project site and surrounding properties over time. Historical Topographic Maps Topographic maps depict elevation of the study area as well as the areas surrounding it and illustrate the location of roads and some buildings. Although topographic maps are not comprehensive, they are another tool in determining whether a study area has been disturbed and at times to what approximate depth. A review of available topographic maps was conducted and includes the following years: 1897, 1900, 1903, 1906, 1908, 1911, 1912, TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 11 MARCH 2023 1917, 1927, 1929, 1932, 1939, 1941, 1947, 1954, 1955, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1965, 1969, 1973, 1975, 1982, 2012, 2015 and 2018 (NETR 2023a, USGS 2023). Table 2 summarizes the results of the historical topographic map review of the proposed Project site and surrounding properties for all available years. Table 2. Review of Historical Topographic Maps Year Description 1897 The map appears to show the proposed Project site and surrounding area as undeveloped land. 1900-1939 There are no significant changes depicted within the proposed Project site. 1941 The map depicts South Etiwanda Avenue running north-south on the west side of the proposed Project site. Union Pacific railroad tracks run parallel on the east side of South Etiwanda Avenue. 1954 A well is depicted in the northwest corner of the proposed Project site. 1955 The proposed Project site is depicted as agricultural land. 1961-1973 There are no significant changes depicted within the proposed Project site. 1975 The proposed Project site is no longer depicted as agricultural land. 1982-2018 There are no significant changes depicted within the proposed Project site. While topographic maps are informative, they do not illustrate the minute changes that can occur to a landscape overtime and at times, are inconsistent with what is depicted year to year. Most often, structures depicted in topographical maps are limited to those with community or social significance (e.g. Firehouses or Hospitals), including additions or changes to roads and/or waterways. Nonetheless, the information gathered contributes to the understanding of the chronological development of a study area. Historical Aerial Photographs A review of historical aerial photographs from the following years was conducted as part of the archival research effort and includes the following years: 1938, 1948, 1959, 1966, 1967, 1985, 19994, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020 (NETR 2023b). Through careful comparative review of historical aerials, changes to the landscape of a study area may be revealed. Disturbance to the study area is specifically important as it helps determine if soils within the study area are capable of sustaining intact archaeological deposits. Additionally, historical aerials have the potential to reveal whether a study area was subjected to alluvial deposits by way of flooding, debris flows or mudslides, as well as placement of artificial or foreign fill soils that may have buried intact archaeological deposits. Table 3 summarizes the results of the aerial photograph review for all available years that include the proposed Project site and surrounding properties. Table 3. Historical Aerial Photograph Review Year Description 1938 The proposed Project site is shown in use for agricultural purposes and is bound on the west by a road (present-day South Etiwanda Avenue), trending north-south. 1948 There are no significant changes to the proposed Project site. 1959 A structure is shown in the northwest corner of the proposed Project site (likely represents the well observed in the 1954 topographic map). TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 12 MARCH 2023 Table 3. Historical Aerial Photograph Review Year Description The landscape appears devoid of agricultural vegetation as observed in 1938 and 1948. 1966 The area just east of South Etiwanda Avenue, along the western boundary of the proposed Project site, has been graded along the length of the road, where there are present-day railroad tracks. 1967 There are no significant changes to the proposed Project site. 1985 The proposed Project site is shown as developed with a large industrial metal building, consistent with present-day site conditions. The railroad tracks are visible, including a spur that ends along the west side of the structure. Industry Way, running parallel to South Etiwanda Avenue, is visible to the east of the proposed Project site. The area between the building and Industry Avenue appears undeveloped. 1994 The land around the industrial building appears to have been paved. 2002 The area between the building and Industry Avenue appears to be paved or graveled for parking, consistent with present-day site conditions. 2005-2020 There are no significant changes to the proposed Project site. Geotechnical Report Review The geotechnical report, Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Industrial Warehouse Development, 11700 Industry Avenue, Fontana, California (NorCal Engineering 2021), was prepared for Patriot Partners in June 2022 to determine the subsurface geological conditions of the present proposed Project site. The report details the results of eight (8) subsurface exploratory borings (B-1 through B-8) using a truck-mounted hollow stem auger and a hand-operated hand auger. These subsurface exploratory investigations were placed at accessible locations throughout the proposed Project site, as depicted in Image 1, below. TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 13 MARCH 2023 Subsurface exploratory borings extended to a maximum depth ranging from 5 to 20 feet below ground surface (bgs) and were completed on October 27, 2021. According to the geotechnical report, the soils encountered include: 1) Fills soils, including asphalt pavement and/or base material: characterized as brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with gravel and cobbles; 2) Natural soils (native soils): characterized as undisturbed soil that is brown, fine to coarse grained, silty to slightly silty sand with gravel and cobbles, and were encountered underlying fill soils to the maximum depths explored. A summary of the subsurface exploratory boring results is provided in Table 4, below. Image 1. Subsurface Exploratory Investigation Locations (NorCal Engineering 2021). TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 14 MARCH 2023 Table 4. Summary of Subsurface Boring Results – NorCal Engineering 2021 Boring Fill Soils Native Soils B-1 0-1.5 feet bgs 1.5-5 feet bgs B-2 0-2 feet bgs 2-10 feet bgs B-3 0-1.5 feet bgs 1.5-20 feet bgs B-4 0-2 feet bgs 2-10 feet bgs B-5 0-1.5 feet bgs 1.5-10 feet bgs B-6 0-2 feet bgs 2-15 feet bgs B-7 0-2 feet bgs 2-10 feet bgs Field Survey Methods Dudek conducted an archaeological pedestrian survey of the proposed Project site on January 11, 2023. Due to present site conditions, which consists of existing buildings, pallets with stacked storage, parked vehicles, and paved lots, formal transects were not employed. Instead, a mixed approach (opportunistic survey) and reconnaissance survey (visual inspection) were utilized, selectively examining areas of exposed ground surfaces, where possible. The survey area included the entire approximately 6-acre proposed Project site within APN 023-817-137. The ground surface was inspected for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., flaked stone tools, tool-making debris, groundstone tools, ceramics, fire-affected rock), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil depressions, features indicative of structures and/or buildings (e.g., standing exterior walls, post holes, foundations), and historical artifacts (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics, building materials). Ground disturbances such as rodent burrows, vehicular tracks, and landscape areas were also visually inspected for exposed subsurface materials. All field notes, photographs, and records related to the current study are on file at Dudek’s Pasadena, California office. All field practices met the Secretary of Interior’s standards and guidelines for a cultural resources inventory. Results The proposed Project site is currently in use with an active industrial warehouse and paved asphalt and gravel covered parking lots. The ground surface consisted of paved asphalt and crushed road base, which accounted for approximately 98 percent of the parcel, and as such, ground surface visibility ranged from non-existent to poor (0 to 5 percent). The only areas with exposed ground soils were directly along Industry Avenue and South Etiwanda Avenue. An abandoned railroad spur was noted west of the existing metal building, branching off the active railroad tracks running parallel to South Etiwanda Avenue. On the day of the survey, a crew was present to install a chain link fence and hand excavated more than 20 postholes for the metal posts along parts of the north, east and west boundaries of the proposed Project site. These TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 15 MARCH 2023 excavations allowed for examination of the soils present on site, up to approximately 2 feet in depth in each posthole. Overall, the visible existing surface comprised of fill soils characterized as brown, fine to medium grained, silty sand with gravels. Soils at greater depths, visible in the postholes excavated for the chain link fence, were a brown, medium to coarse grained, silty sand with gravels and cobbles. Note: the geotechnical study revealed that the proposed Project site is predominately covered in fill soils. As such, any exposed soils observed at the surface during the survey were likely fill soils and not a good representation of the native soils present prior to development/ground disturbing activities. However, the exposure of deeper deposits due to the fencing activity allowed for examination of buried, natural soils. No cultural materials were identified as a result of the survey. As previously mentioned in Geotechnical Report Review section, subsurface exploratory investigations identified fill soils, including asphalt and/or base materials at depths from surface to between 1.5 and 2 feet bgs, depending on the location investigated, at all boring/ locations within the proposed Project site (see Table 4). The presence of the fill soil is an indication that any potential cultural material from surface to between 1.5 and 2 feet bgs, has been previously displaced from the primary depositional location, buried, or destroyed. Additionally, the presence of fill soils demonstrates that the native soils upon and within which cultural deposits would exist in context was not observed during the survey. No cultural materials were observed within the proposed Project site; however, due to the presence of fill soils, observation of intact native soils across the proposed Project site was not possible. Summary and Management Considerations Dudek completed a review of the CHRIS records search results for the proposed Project site and a 0.5-mile (2,640- foot) records search area. Results of the records search indicate that the entirety of the proposed Project site has not been subject to any previous cultural resources investigations that include a records search or pedestrian survey prior to development and/or the placement of fill soils. No prehistoric or historic period archaeological resources have been identified within the proposed Project site or 0.5-mile records search area through the CHRIS database; however, as previously mentioned, no previous cultural resource investigations have been completed for the proposed Project site. A review of a geotechnical report prepared for the proposed Project site indicated that fill soils, including asphalt and/or base materials were encountered between surface and 2 feet bgs and are underlain by native soils. The proposed Project site’s native soils consist of Quaternary alluvium and marine deposits from the Pleistocene to Holocene geologic age. More specifically, the proposed Project site is underlain by Quaternary younger fan deposits associated with the Holocene age. Holocene-era alluvial formations do have the potential to support the presence of buried archaeological resources. These soils are associated with the period of prehistoric human use, as well as represent ongoing processes of development that have potential to preserve cultural material in context, depending on area-specific topographical setting. Current Project design indicates that the depths of ground disturbance across the proposed Project is between 3 to 4 feet with a maximum depth of disturbance of 14 feet below existing ground surface. A review of historical maps and aerial photographs indicate that the proposed Project site has been undeveloped as early as 1896 and in use for agricultural purposes between 1938 and 1973. The present-day warehouse is first TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 16 MARCH 2023 captured in the 1985 aerial photograph. By 2002, development within the proposed Project site is shown to be consistent with present-day site conditions. In consideration of all these factors, the potential to encounter intact deposits containing archaeological resources within soils between the current grade and 2 feet bgs is unlikely; however, ground disturbing activities within the proposed Project site at depths exceeding 2 feet bgs is unknown. As such, adherence to the mitigation measures (MMs) established in the Program Environmental Impact Report for the Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) Specific Plan (SP) area pertaining to prehistoric and historic-period archaeological resources, such as response and treatment of inadvertent discovery of unknown cultural resources would ensure that any potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources within the proposed Project site would be less-than-significant. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions about this letter report and its findings. Linda Kry can be reached by email at lkry@dudek.com and Heather McDaniel McDevitt can be reached at hmcdevitt@dudek.com. Sincerely, ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Linda Kry, B.A., RA Heather McDaniel McDevitt, M.A., RPA Archaeologist Archaeologist Att: Appendix A: Figures Appendix B. (Confidential) SCCIC Records Search Information cc: Christine Fukasawa, Patrick Cruz, Dudek TO: MR. LONNIE P. NADAL SUBJECT: DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE 11700 INDUSTRY AVENUE BUILDING WAREHOUSE PROJECT, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 15031 17 MARCH 2023 References Calflora. 2022. What Grows Here. Accessed August 2022. https://www.calflora.org/entry/wgh.html California Geological Survey. 2002. California Department of Conservation California Geomorphic Provinces. Accessed November 2022. https://www.coastal.ca.gov/coastalvoices/resources/California_Geomorphic_Provinces.pdf Google. 2023. Google Earth; desktop application; Elevation of the proposed Project site. Accessed March 2023. https://www.google.com/earth/. NETR (Nationwide Environmental Title Research LLC). 2023a Historical Topographic Maps dating from 1897, 1900, 1903, 1906, 1908, 1911, 1912, 1917, 1927, 1929, 1932, 1939, 1941, 1947, 1954, 1955, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1965, 1969, 1973, 1975, 1982, 2012, 2015 and 2018. Accessed February 2023. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. NETR. 2023b. Historic Aerial Photographs dating from 1938, 1948, 1959, 1966, 1967, 1985, 19994, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020. Accessed February 2023. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. NorCal Engineering. 2021. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Proposed Industrial Warehouse Development, 11700 Industry Avenue, Fontana, California. Prepared for Shubin Nadal Realty Investors. Newport Beach, California. OHP (Office of Historic Preservation). 1995. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. Available online October 2021. Website: http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=1069. USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). 2023a. Web Soil Survey. ttps://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/ App/HomePage.htm. Accessed February 2023. USDA. 2023b. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/T/TUJUNGA.html. Accessed February 2023. USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer. 2023b. Historical Topographic Maps for 1941 and 1954. Accessed January 2023. USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer (arcgis.com) Appendix A Figures Project Location 11700 Industry Ave Warehouse SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series Guasti QuadrangleTownship 1S; Range 6W; Section 33 Da t e : 2 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 3 - L a s t s a v e d b y : h m c o m b e r - P a t h : Z : \ P r o j e c t s \ j 1 5 0 3 1 0 1 \ M A P D O C \ D O C U M E N T \ C u l t u r a l \ F i g u r e 1 P r o j e c t L o c a t i o n . m xd 02,0001,000 Feet Project Boundary FIGURE 1 1:24,000 0570285Meters Dana Point Fullerton Temecula BlytheMurrieta Indian Wells CathedralCity Yucaipa YuccaValley TwentyninePalms Hesperia VictorvillePalmdale Lancaster Needles Beaumont Barstow CaliforniaCity Ridgecrest Inyo County San Bernardino County Nevada County Arizona County 66 395 95 22 39 206 330 178 173 241 243 91 861 78 60 177 2 14 79 247 58 74 38 111 138 18 127 15 40 215 5 210 10 Project Site Project Area 11700 Industry Ave Warehouse SOURCE: Bing Maps (accessed 2023); San Bernadino County 2023 Da t e : 2 / 2 7 / 2 0 2 3 - L a s t s a v e d b y : h m c o m b e r - P a t h : Z : \ P r o j e c t s \ j 1 5 0 3 1 0 1 \ M A P D O C \ D O C U M E N T \ C u l t u r a l \ F i g u r e 2 P r o j e c t A r e a . m x d 0400200Feet Project Boundary Parcels (shown in white) FIGURE 2 1:4,800 011055Meters APN: 023-817-137 Appendix B (Confidential) SCCIC Records Search Results