HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C - Cultural Resources StudyCULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY FOR THE
RC HOMES – CITRUS AVENUE PROJECT
CITY OF FONTANA,
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
APN 1110-361-10
Lead Agency:
City of Fontana
Community Development Department
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
Preparer:
BFSA Environmental Services,
a Perennial Company
14010 Poway Road, Suite A
Poway, California 92064
Project Proponent:
EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
May 14 2025
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
i
Archaeological Database Information
Authors: Kathleen A. Krogh, B.A. and Tracy A. Stropes, M.A., RPA
Consulting Firm: BFSA Environmental Services,
a Perennial Company
14010 Poway Road, Suite A
Poway, California 92064
(858) 484-0915
Client/Project Proponent: EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Lead Agency: City of Fontana
Community Development Department
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
Report Date: May 14, 2025
Report Title: Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue
Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California
Type of Study: Phase I Cultural Resources Study
USGS Quadrangle: Section 1, Township 1 South, Range 6 West of the Fontana,
California (7.5-minute) USGS Quadrangle
Acreage: Approximately 5.3 acres
Key Words: Survey; no cultural resources identified; Fontana USGS
Quadrangle; no further archaeological study or monitoring
recommended.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
ii
Table of Contents
Section Description Page
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT ........................................................................ iv
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1.0–1
1.1 Project Description............................................................................................1.0–1
1.2 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................1.0–1
1.3 Cultural Setting .................................................................................................1.0–5
1.3.1 Results of the Archaeological Records Search ........................................1.0–14
1.3.2 Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search ........1.0–16
1.4 Applicable Regulations .....................................................................................1.0–16
1.4.1 California Environmental Quality Act .....................................................1.0–16
2.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................2.0–1
3.0 ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTS ....................................................................3.0–1
3.1 Methods.............................................................................................................3.0–1
3.2 Results of the Field Survey ...............................................................................3.0–1
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................................4.0–1
5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED .......................5.0–1
6.0 CERTIFICATION ...................................................................................................6.0–1
7.0 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................7.0–1
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Resumes of Key Personnel
Appendix B – Archaeological Records Search Results*
Appendix C – NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results*
* Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix
List of Figures
Figure Description Page
Figure 1.1–1 General Location Map ...................................................................................1.0–2
Figure 1.1–2 Project Location Map ....................................................................................1.0–3
Figure 1.1–3 Site Plan .........................................................................................................1.0–4
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
iii
List of Plates
Plate Description Page
Plate 3.2–1 Overview of the eastern half of the project, facing east ..................................3.0–2
Plate 3.2–2 Overview of the western half of the project, facing west ................................3.0–2
List of Tables
Table Description Page
Table 1.3–1 Cultural Resources Located Within One Mile of the RC Homes – Citrus
Avenue Project ................................................................................................1.0–15
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iv
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT
The following report describes the results of the cultural resources survey conducted by
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company (BFSA), for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue
Project. The approximately 5.3-acre study area for the project is identified as Assessor’s Parcel
Number (APN) 1110-361-10, located southwest of the intersection of Malaga and Citrus avenues,
in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Further, the project is situated within
Section 1, Township 1 South, Range 6 West of the San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian on the
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Fontana, California (7.5-minute) topographic
quadrangle map.
The purpose of this investigation was to locate and record any cultural resources within the
project and subsequently evaluate any resources as part of the County of San Bernardino
environmental review process conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). As a part of this cultural resources study, BFSA conducted an archaeological records
search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University,
Fullerton (CSU Fullerton) in order to assess previous archaeological studies and identify any
previously recorded archaeological sites within the project or in the immediate vicinity. The
records search identified 19 resources within one mile of the project; however, no resources are
recorded within the subject property. In addition, the search identified 20 previous cultural
resources studies within one mile of the project , one of which overlaps the subject property
(Alexandrowicz et al. 1992). Further, a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was also requested from
the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which was returned with positive results.
The Phase I archaeological survey conducted on March 24, 2025, did not locate any
cultural resources within the subject property. These findings are consistent with the records
search results, which found that the majority of the resources recorded within one mile of the
property are associated with the built environment. The review of historic imagery indicates the
property has never contained any structures, having historically been utilized for agriculture.
Furthermore, the subject property has been cleared and disced numerous times in recent years.
Given the lack of historic development/occupation within the property, coupled with the survey
results and previous ground-disturbing clearing and discing activities, there is little to no potential
for archaeological resources to be encountered by the proposed project. As such, no further
archaeological study or monitoring of grading is recommended. A copy of this report will be
permanently filed with SCCIC at CSU Fullerton. All notes, photographs, and other materials
related to this project will be curated at the archaeological laboratory of BFSA in Poway,
California.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The cultural resources study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project was conducted in
order to comply with CEQA and City of Fontana environmental guidelines. The project is located
southwest of the intersection of Malaga and Citrus avenues in the city of Fontana, San Bernardino
County, California (Figure 1.1–1). The approximately 5.3-acre property (APN 1110-361-10) is
situated within Section 1, Township 1 South, Range 6 West of the San Bernardino Baseline and
Meridian on the USGS (7.5-minute) Fontana, California topographic quadrangle map (Figure 1.1–
2). The project applicant proposes the construction of a residential development with associated
hardscape and infrastructure (Figure 1.1–3).
The decision to request this investigation was based upon the cultural resource sensitivity
of the locality, as suggested by known site density and predictive modeling. Sensitivity for cultural
resources in a given area is usually indicated by known settlement patterns. The proximity to Lytle
Creek and the terrestrial ecosystems surrounding the creek are part of an environmental setting
that supported a significant prehistoric population for over 10,000 years. Regarding historic
resources, the property is located within an area that historically supported rural
residential/agricultural activities; however, at the present, all surrounding properties are
characterized as residential subdivisions primarily constructed during the late twentieth century
and early 2000s.
1.2 Environmental Setting
The project is located approximately in the middle of the broad Lytle Creek alluvial fan
that emanates from the San Gabriel Mountains approximately four miles to the north of the project
as a result of uplift and dissection of the eastern San Gabriel Mountains. The main source of these
sediments is from the Lytle Creek drainage, located near where the northwest - to southeast-
trending San Andreas Fault zone cuts across and separates the San Gabriel and San Bernardino
mountain ranges (Morton and Miller 2006). Geomorphically, the project is relatively flat lying,
with a gentle slope to the south and an average elevation of approximately 1,324 feet above mean
sea level. Geologically, the project is mapped as Holocene young alluvial fan sediments,
consisting of mostly sand (Morton and Miller 2006; Wirths 2025). The specific soil types found
within the project are characterized as Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (TvC)
(NRCS 2019).
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–5
Historically, the project appears to have been utilized for agriculture. During the
prehistoric period, vegetation near the project provided sufficient food resources to support
prehistoric human occupants. Animals that inhabited the project during prehistoric times included
mammals such as rabbits, squirrels, gophers, mice, rats, deer, and coyotes, in addition to a variety
of reptiles and amphibians. The natural setting of the project during the prehistoric occupation
offered a rich nutritional resource base. Fresh water was likely obtainable from surrounding
creeks, streams, and the Santa Ana River, the latter of which is located approximately 7.5 miles
southeast of the project.
1.3 Cultural Setting
Paleo Indian, Archaic Period Milling Stone Horizon, and the Late Prehistoric Shoshonean
groups are the three general cultural periods represented in San Bernardino County. The following
discussion of the cultural history of San Bernardino County references the San Dieguito Complex,
the Encinitas Tradition, the Milling Stone Horizon, the La Jolla Complex, the Pauma Complex,
and the San Luis Rey Complex, since these culture sequences have been used to describe
archaeological manifestations in the region. The Late Prehistoric component in the southwestern
area of San Bernardino County was represented by the Gabrielino and Serrano Indians. According
to Kroeber (1976), the Serrano probably owned a stretch of the Sierra Madre from Cucamonga
east to above Mentone and halfway up to San Timoteo Canyon, including the San Bernardino
Valley and just missing Riverside County. However, Kroeber (1976) also states that this area has
been assigned to the Gabrielino, “which would be a more natural division of topography, s ince it
would leave the Serrano pure mountaineers.”
Absolute chronological information, where possible, will be incorporated into this
discussion to examine the effectiveness of continuing to use these terms interchangeably.
Reference will be made to the geologic framework that divides the culture chronology of the area
into four segments: late Pleistocene (20,000 to 10,000 years before the present [YBP]), early
Holocene (10,000 to 6,650 YBP), middle Holocene (6,650 to 3,350 YBP), and late Holocene
(3,350 to 200 YBP).
Paleo Indian Period (Late Pleistocene: 11,500 to circa 9,000 YBP)
The Paleo Indian Period is associated with the terminus of the late Pleistocene (12,000 to
10,000 YBP). The environment during the late Pleistocene was cool and moist, which allowed for
glaciation in the mountains and the formation of deep, pluvial lakes in the deserts and basin lands
(Moratto 1984). However, by the terminus of the late Pleistocene, the climate became warmer,
which caused glaciers to melt, sea levels to rise, greater coastal erosion, large lakes to recede and
evaporate, extinction of Pleistocene megafauna, and major vegetation changes (Moratto 1984;
Martin 1967, 1973; Fagan 1991). The coastal shoreline at 10,000 YBP, depending upon the
particular area of the coast, was near the 30-meter isobath, or two to six kilometers further west
than its present location (Masters 1983).
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–6
Paleo Indians were likely attracted to multiple habitat types, including mountains,
marshlands, estuaries, and lakeshores. These people likely subsisted using a more generalized
hunting, gathering, and collecting adaptation, utilizing a variety of resources including birds,
mollusks, and both large and small mammals (Erlandson and Colten 1991; Moratto 1984; Moss
and Erlandson 1995).
Archaic Period (Early and Middle Holocene: circa 9,000 to 1,300 YBP)
The Archaic Period of prehistory began with the onset of the Holocene circa 9,000 YBP.
The transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene was a period of major environmental change
throughout North America (Antevs 1953; Van Devender and Spaulding 1979). The general
warming trend caused sea levels to rise, lakes to evaporate, and drainage patterns to change. In
southern California, the general climate at the beginning of the early Holocene was marked by
cool/moist periods and an increase in warm/dry periods and sea levels. The coastal shoreline at
8,000 YBP, depending upon the particular area of the coast, was near the 20-meter isobath, or one
to four kilometers further west than its present location (Masters 1983).
The rising sea level during the early Holocene created rocky shorelines and bays along the
coast by flooding valley floors and eroding the coastline (Curray 1965; Inman 1983). Shorelines
were primarily rocky with small littoral cells, as sediments were deposited at bay edges but rarely
discharged into the ocean (Reddy 2000). These bays eventually evolved into lagoons and
estuaries, which provided a rich habitat for mollusks and fish. The warming trend and rising sea
levels generally continued until the late Holocene (4,000 to 3,500 YBP).
At the beginning of the late Holocene, sea levels stabilized, rocky shores declined, lagoons
filled with sediment, and sandy beaches became established (Gallegos 1985; Inman 1983; Masters
1994; Miller 1966; Warren and Pavesic 1963). Many former lagoons became saltwater marshes
surrounded by coastal sage scrub by the late Holocene (Gallegos 2002). The sedimentation of the
lagoons was significant in that it had profound effects upon the types of resources available to
prehistoric peoples. Habitat was lost for certain large mollusks, namely Chione and Argopecten,
but habitat was gained for other small mollusks, particularly Donax (Gallegos 1985; Reddy 2000).
The changing lagoon habitats resulted in the decline of larger shellfish, the loss of drinking water,
and the loss of Torrey Pine nuts, causing a major depopulation of the coast as people shifted inland
to reliable freshwater sources and intensified their exploitation of terrestrial small game and plants,
including acorns (originally proposed by Rogers 1929; Gallegos 2002).
The Archaic Period in southern California is associated with a number of different cultures,
complexes, traditions, horizons, and periods, including San Dieguito, La Jolla, Encinitas, Milling
Stone, Pauma, and Intermediate.
Late Prehistoric Period (Late Holocene: 1,300 YBP to 1790)
Approximately 1,350 YBP, a Shoshonean-speaking group from the Great Basin region
moved into San Bernardino County, marking the transition into the Late Prehistoric Period. This
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–7
period has been characterized by higher population densities and elaborations in social, political,
and technological systems. Economic systems diversified and intensified during this period, with
the continued elaboration of trade networks, the use of shell-bead currency, and the appearance of
more labor-intensive, yet effective, technological innovations. Technological developments
during this period included the introduction of the bow and arrow between A.D. 400 and 600 and
the introduction of ceramics. Atlatl darts were replaced by smaller arrow darts, including the
Cottonwood series points. Other hallmarks of the Late Prehistoric Period include extensive trade
networks as far reaching as the Colorado River Basin and cremation of the dead.
Protohistoric Period (Late Holocene: 1790 to Present)
Gabrielino
The territory of the Gabrielino at the time of Spanish contact covers much of present-day
Los Angeles and Orange counties. The southern extent of this culture area is bounded by Aliso
Creek, the eastern extent is located east of present-day San Bernardino along the Santa Ana River,
the northern extent includes the San Fernando Valley, and the western extent includes portions of
the Santa Monica Mountains. The Gabrielino also occupied several Channel Islands including
Santa Barbara Island, Santa Catalina Island, San Nicholas Island, and San Clemente Island.
Because of their access to certain resources, including a steatite source from Santa Catalina Island,
this group was among the wealthiest and most populous aboriginal groups in all of southern
California. Trade of materials and resources controlled by the Gabrielino extended as far north as
the San Joaquin Valley, as far east as the Colorado River, and as far south as Baja California (Bean
and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
The Gabrielino lived in permanent villages and smaller resource gathering camps occupied
at various times of the year depending upon the seasonality of the resource. Larger villages were
comprised of several families or clans, while smaller seasonal camps typically housed smaller
family units. The coastal area between San Pedro and Topanga Canyon was the location of
primary subsistence villages, while secondary sites were located near inland sage stands, oak
groves, and pine forests. Permanent villages were located along rivers and streams, as well as in
sheltered areas along the coast. As previously mentioned, the Channel Islands were also the
locations of relatively large settlements (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Resources procured along the coast and on the islands were primarily marine in nature and
included tuna, swordfish, ray, shark, California sea lion, Stellar sea lion, harbor seal, northern
elephant seal, sea otter, dolphin, porpoise, various waterfowl species, numerous fish species,
purple sea urchin, and mollusks such as rock scallop, California mussel, and limpet. Inland
resources included oak acorn, pine nut, Mohave yucca, cacti, sage, grass nut, deer, rabbit, hare,
rodent, quail, duck, and a variety of reptiles such as western pond turtle and snakes (Bean and
Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
The social structure of the Gabrielino is little known; however, there appears to have been
at least three social classes: 1) the elite, which included the rich, chiefs, and their immediate family;
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–8
2) a middle class, which included people of relatively high economic status or long-established
lineages; and 3) a class of people that included most other individuals in the society. Villages were
politically autonomous units comprised of several lineages. During times of the year when certain
seasonal resources were available, the village would divide into lineage groups and move out to
exploit them, returning to the village between forays (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Each lineage had its own leader, with the village chief coming from the dominant lineage.
Several villages might be allied under a paramount chief. Chiefly positions were of an ascribed
status, most often passed to the eldest son. Chiefly duties included providing village cohesion,
leading warfare and peace negotiations with other groups, collecting tribute from the village(s)
under his jurisdiction, and arbitrating disputes within the village(s). The status of the chief was
legitimized by his safekeeping of the sacred bundle, which was a representation of the link between
the material and spiritual realms and the embodiment of power (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber
1976).
Shamans were leaders in the spirit realm. The duties of the shaman included conducting
healing and curing ceremonies, guarding the sacred bundle, locating lost items, identifying and
collecting poisons for arrows, and making rain (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Marriages were made between individuals of equal social status, and in the case of
powerful lineages, marriages were arranged to establish political ties between the lineages (Bean
and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Men conducted the majority of the heavy labor, hunting, fishing, and trading with other
groups. Women’s duties included gathering and preparing plant and animal resources, and making
baskets, pots, and clothing (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Gabrielino houses were domed, circular structures made of thatched vegetation. Houses
varied in size and could house from one to several families. Sweathouses (semicircular, earth -
covered buildings) were public structures used in male social ceremonies. Other structures
included menstrual huts and a ceremonial structure called a yuvar, an open-air structure built near
the chief’s house (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Clothing was minimal. Men and children most often went naked, while women wore
deerskin or bark aprons. In cold weather, deerskin, rabbit fur, or bird skin (with feathers intact)
cloaks were worn. Island and coastal groups used sea otter fur for cloaks. In areas of rough terrain,
yucca fiber sandals were worn. Women often used red ochre on their faces and skin for adornment
or protection from the sun. Adornment items included feathers, fur, shells, and beads (Bean and
Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
Hunting implements included wood clubs, sinew-backed bows, slings, and throwing clubs.
Maritime implements included rafts, harpoons, spears, hook and line, and nets. A variety of other
tools included deer scapulae saws, bone and shell needles, bone awls, scrapers, bone or shell
flakers, wedges, stone knives and drills, metates, mullers, manos, shell spoons, bark platters, and
wood paddles and bowls. Baskets were made from rush, deer grass, and skunkbush. Baskets were
fashioned for hoppers, plates, trays, and winnowers for leaching, straining, and gathering. Baskets
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–9
were also used for storing, preparing, and serving food, and for keeping personal and ceremonial
items (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber 1976).
The Gabrielino had exclusive access to soapstone, or steatite, procured from Santa Catalina
Island quarries. This highly prized material was used for making pipes, animal carvings, ritual
objects, ornaments, and cooking utensils. The Gabrielino profited well from trading steatite since
it was valued so much by groups throughout southern California (Bean and Smith 1978a; Kroeber
1976).
Serrano
Aboriginally, the Serrano occupied an area east of present-day Los Angeles. According to
Bean and Smith (1978b), definitive boundaries are difficult to place for the Serrano due to their
sociopolitical organization and a lack of reliable data:
The Serrano were organized into autonomous localized lineages occupying
definite, favored territories, but rarely claiming any territory far removed from the
lineage’s home base. Since the entire dialectical group was neither politically
united nor amalgamated into supralineage groups, as many of their neighbors were,
one must speak in terms of generalized areas of usage rather than pan-tribal
holdings. (Strong [1929] in Bean and Smith 1978b)
However, researchers place the Serrano in the San Bernardino Mountains east of Cajon Pass and
at the base of and north of the mountains near Victorville, east to Twentynine Palms, and south to
the Yucaipa Valley (Bean and Smith 1978b). Serrano has been used broadly for languages in the
Takic family including Serrano, Kitanemuk, Vanyume, and Tataviam.
The Serrano were part of “exogamous clans, which in turn were affiliated with one of two
exogamous moieties, tukwutam (Wildcat) and wahiʔiam (Coyote)” (Bean and Smith 1978b).
According to Strong (1971), details such as number, structure, and function of the clans are
unknown. Instead, he states that clans were not political, but were rather structured based upon
“economic, marital, or ceremonial reciprocity, a pattern common throughout Southern California”
(Bean and Smith 1978b). The Serrano formed alliances amongst their own clans and with
Cahuilla, Chemehuevi, Gabrielino, and Cupeño clans (Bean and Smith 1978b). Clans were large,
autonomous, political and landholding units formed patrilineally, with all males descending from
a common male ancestor, including all wives and descendants of the males. However, even after
marriage, women would still keep their original lineage and would still participate in those
ceremonies (Bean and Smith 1978b).
According to Bean and Smith (1978b), the cosmogony and cosmography of the Serrano
are very similar to those of the Cahuilla:
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–10
There are twin creator gods, a creation myth told in “epic poem” style, each local
group having its own origin story, water babies whose crying foretells death,
supernatural beings of various kinds and on various hierarchically arranged power-
access levels, an Orpheus-like myth, mythical deer that no one can kill, and tales
relating the adventures (and misadventures) of Coyote, a tragicomic trickster-
transformer culture hero. (Bean [1962-1972] and Benedict [1924] in Bean and
Smith 1978b)
The Serrano had a shaman, a person who acquired their powers through dreams, which were
induced through ingestion of the hallucinogen datura. The shaman was mostly a curer/healer,
using herbal remedies and “sucking out the disease-causing agents” (Bean and Smith 1978b).
Serrano village locations were typically located near water sources. Individual family
dwellings were likely circular, domed structures. Daily household activities would either take
place outside of the house out in the open, or under a ramada constructed of a thatched willow pole
roof held up by four or more poles inserted into the ground. Families could consist of a husband,
wife/wives, unmarried female children, married male children, the husband’s parents, and/or
widowed aunts and uncles. Rarely, an individual would occupy his own house, typically in the
mountains. Serrano villages also included a large ceremonial house where the lineage leader
would live, which served as the religious center for lineages or lineage-sets, granaries, and
sweathouses (Bean and Smith 1978b).
The Serrano were primarily hunters and gatherers. Vegetal staples varied with locality.
Acorns and piñon nuts were found in the foothills, and mesquite, yucca roots, cacti fruits, and
piñon nuts were found in or near the desert regions. Diets were supplemented with other roots,
bulbs, shoots, and seeds (Heizer 1978). Deer, mountain sheep, antelopes, rabbits, and other small
rodents were among the principal food packages. Various game birds, especially quail, were also
hunted. The bow and arrow was used for large game, while smaller game and birds were killed
with curved throwing sticks, traps, and snares. Occasionally, game was hunted communally, often
during mourning ceremonies (Benedict 1924; Drucker 1937; Heizer 1978). Earth ovens were used
to cook meat, bones were boiled to extract marrow, and blood was either drunk cold or cooked to
a thicker consistency and then eaten. Some meat and vegetables were sun-dried and stored. Food
acquisition and processing required the manufacture of additional items such as knives, stone or
bone scrapers, pottery trays and bowls, bone or horn spoons, and stirrers. Mortars, made of either
stone or wood, and metates were also manufactured (Strong 1971; Drucker 1937; Benedict 1924).
The Serrano were very similar technologically to the Cahuilla. In general, manufactured
goods included baskets, some pottery, rabbit-skin blankets, awls, arrow straighteners, sinew-
backed bows, arrows, fire drills, stone pipes, musical instruments (rattles, rasps, whistles, bull-
roarers, and flutes), feathered costumes, mats for floor and wall coverings, bags, storage pouches,
cordage (usually comprised of yucca fiber), and nets (Heizer 1978).
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–11
Ethnohistoric Period (1769 to Present)
The historic background of the project area began with the Spanish colonization of Alta
California. The first Spanish colonizing expedition reached southern California in 1769 with the
intention of converting and civilizing the indigenous populations, as well as expanding the
knowledge of and access to new resources in the region (Brigandi 1998). As a result, by the late
eighteenth century, a large portion of southern California was overseen by Mission San Luis Rey
(San Diego County), Mission San Juan Capistrano (Orange County), and Mission San Gabriel
(Los Angeles County), who began colonization in the region and surrounding areas (Chapman
1921).
Up until this time, the only known way to feasibly travel from Sonora to Alta California
was by sea. In 1774, Juan Bautista de Anza, an army captain at Tubac, requested and was given
permission by the governor of the Mexican State of Sonora to establish an overland route from
Sonora to Monterey (Chapman 1921). In doing so, Juan Bautista de Anza passed through what is
now Riverside County and described the area in writing for the first time (Caughey 1970; Chapman
1921). In 1797, Father Presidente Lausen (of Mission San Diego de Alcalá), Father Norberto de
Santiago, and Corporal Pedro Lisalde (of Mission San Juan Capistrano) led an expedition through
southwestern Riverside County in search of a new mission site to establish a presence between
San Diego and San Juan Capistrano (Engelhardt 1921). Their efforts ultimately resulted in the
establishment of Mission San Luis Rey in Oceanside, California.
Each mission gained power through the support of a large, subjugated Native American
workforce. As the missions grew, livestock holdings increased and became more vulnerable to
theft. In order to protect their interests, the southern California missions began to expand inland
to try and provide additional security (Beattie and Beattie 1939; Caughey 1970). In order to meet
their needs, the Spaniards embarked on a formal expedition in 1806 to find potential locations
within what is now the San Bernardino Valley. As a result, by 1810, Father Francisco Dumetz of
Mission San Gabriel had succeeded in establishing a religious site, or capilla, at a Cahuilla
rancheria called Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). San Bernardino Valley received its name
from this site, which was dedicated to San Bernardino de Siena by Father Dumetz. The Guachama
rancheria was located in present-day Bryn Mawr in San Bernardino County.
These early colonization efforts were followed by the establishment of estancias at Puente
(circa 1816) and San Bernardino (circa 1819) near Guachama (Beattie and Beattie 1939). These
efforts were soon mirrored by the Spaniards from Mission San Luis Rey, who in turn established
a presence in what is now Lake Elsinore, Temecula, and Murrieta (Chapman 1921). The
indigenous groups who occupied these lands were recruited by missionaries, converted, and put to
work in the missions (Pourade 1961). Throughout this period, the Native American populations
were decimated by introduced diseases, a drastic shift in diet resulting in poor nutrition, and social
conflicts due to the introduction of an entirely new social order (Cook 1976).
Mexico achieved independence from Spain in 1822 and became a federal republic in 1824.
As a result, both Baja and Alta California were classified as territories (Rolle 1969). Shortly
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–12
thereafter, the Mexican Republic sought to grant large tracts of private land to its citizens to begin
to encourage immigration to California and to establish its presence in the region. Part of the
establishment of power and control included the desecularization of the missions circa 1832.
These same missions were also located on some of the most fertile land in California and were
considered highly valuable as a result. The resulting land grants, known as “ranchos,” covered
expansive portions of California and by 1846, more than 600 land grants had been issued by the
Mexican government. Rancho Jurupa was the first rancho to be established and was issued to Juan
Bandini in 1838. Although Bandini primarily resided in San Diego, Rancho Jurupa was located
in what is now Riverside County (Pourade 1963).
The treatment of Native Americans grew worse during the Rancho Period. Most of the
Native Americans were forced off of their land or put to work on the now privately-owned ranchos,
most often as slave labor. In light of the brutal ranchos, the degree to which Native Americans
had become dependent upon the mission system is evident when, in 1838, a group of Native
Americans from Mission San Luis Rey petitioned government officials in San Diego to relieve
suffering at the hands of the rancheros:
We have suffered incalculable losses, for some of which we are in part to be blamed
for because many of us have abandoned the Mission … We plead and beseech you
… to grant us a Rev. Father for this place. We have been accustomed to the Rev.
Fathers and to their manner of managing the duties. We labored under their
intelligent directions, and we were obedient to the Fathers according to the
regulations, because we considered it as good for us. (Brigandi 1998:21)
Native American culture had been disrupted to the point where they could no longer rely
upon prehistoric subsistence and social patterns. Not only does this illustrate how dependent the
Native Americans had become upon the missionaries, but it also indicates a marked contrast in the
way the Spanish treated the Native Americans compared to the Mexican and United States
ranchers. Spanish colonialism (missions) is based upon utilizing human resources while
integrating them into their society. The Mexican and American ranchers did not accept Native
Americans into their social order and used them specifically for the extraction of labor, resources,
and profit. Rather than being incorporated, they were either subjugated or exterminated (Cook
1976).
By 1846, tensions between the United States and Mexico had escalated to the point of war
(Rolle 1969). In order to reach a peaceful agreement, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was put
into effect in 1848, which resulted in the annexation of California to the United States. Once
California opened to the United States, waves of settlers moved in searching for gold mines,
business opportunities, political opportunities, religious freedom, and adventure (Rolle 1969;
Caughey 1970). By 1850, California had become a state and was eventually divided into 27
separate counties. While a much larger population was now settling in California, this was
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–13
primarily in the central valley, San Francisco, and the Gold Rush region of the Sierra Nevada
mountain range (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). During this time, southern California grew at a much
slower pace than northern California and was still dominated by the cattle industry established
during the earlier rancho period.
During the same decade, circa 1852, the Native Americans of southern Riverside County,
including the Luiseño and the Cahuilla, thought they had signed a treaty resulting in their
ownership of all lands from Temecula to Aguanga east to the desert, including the San Jacinto
Valley and the San Gorgonio Pass. The Temecula Treaty also included food and clothing
provisions for the Native Americans. However, Congress never ratified these treaties, and the
promise of one large reservation was rescinded (Brigandi 1998).
With the completion of the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1869, southern California saw its
first major population expansion. The population boom continued circa 1874 with the completion
of connections between the Southern Pacific Railroad in Sacramento to the transcontinental
Central Pacific Railroad in Los Angeles (Rolle 1969; Caughey 1970). The population influx
brought farmers, land speculators, and prospective developers to the region.
General History of the City of Fontana
In 1869, Andrew Jackson Pope, co-founder of the Pope & Talbot Company, a lumber
dealer based out of San Francisco (Ancestry.com 2009a, 2009b; University of Washington
Libraries, Special Collections 2018), purchased 3,840 acres of land in San Bernardino County as
part of the Land Act of 1820. According to one source, “During the ensuing years, Andrew Pope
and W.C. Talbot acquired other properties in the West, chiefly in California. By 1874, they owned
a real estate empire, including almost 80,000 acres of ranch lands” (World Forestry Center 2017).
Pope passed away in 1878, amid water rights conflicts between grant owners (himself) and
settlers of the lands surrounding his Fontana-area lands. As a result of the water rights conflict, in
which the United States Supreme Court sided with the grant owners, the Lytle Creek Water
Company was formed in 1881. The purpose of the Lytle Creek Water Company was to:
[U]nify the interests of appropriators to the stream, to fight the grant owners. These
latter had the law on their side, but the settlers had the water, and were holding and
using it. An injunction was issued in favor of the grant owners, restraining the
settlers from using the water, but it was never enforced. The conflict was a long
and bitter one. In the meantime, the grant owners, and others operating with them,
quietly bought up the stock of the Lytle Creek Water Company, until enough to
control it was secured, and sold out these rights to the projectors of the Semi-tropic
Land and Water Company, with the riparian lands, which movement seems to have
quieted the conflict. (Hall 1888)
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–14
The Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company was incorporated in 1887. That year, the company
platted the settlement of Rosena, but no structures were erected. By 1888, the company had
acquired “something more than twenty-eight thousand five hundred acres of land, embracing the
channel of Lytle creek for ten miles” (Hall 1888).
In 1903, San Bernardino contractor and agriculturist A.B. Miller and “his pioneer Fontana
Development Company purchased Rosena and, by 1905, had begun the building of a farming
complex that included an assortment of barns, dining rooms, a 200-man bunk house, a kitchen, a
company store, as well as the ranch house used by the foreman” (Anicic 1982). By 1906, Miller
had also taken over the remainder of the Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company assets and created
the Fontana Farms Company and the Fontana Land Company. Afterward, Miller oversaw the
construction of an irrigation system that utilized the water from Lytle Creek, as well as the planting
of “half a million eucalyptus saplings as windbreaks” (Cornford 1995).
In 1913, the town of Fontana was platted between Foothill Boulevard and the Santa Fe
railroad tracks. Much of the land to the south of the townsite was utilized as a hog farm, while the
remainder of the Fontana Farms Company land was subdivided into small farms. The smaller
“starter farms” were approximately 2.5 acres and the new owner was able to choose between
grapevines or walnut trees, all supplied by the Fontana Farms nursery. One source states that “By
1930 the Fontana Company had subdivided more than three thousand homesteads, half occupied
by full-time settlers, some of them immigrants from Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Italy” (Cornford
1995).
Kaiser Steel was founded in Fontana in the 1940s and became one of the main producers
of steel west of the Mississippi River. To provide for his workers’ health needs, Henry J. Kaiser
constructed the Fontana Kaiser Permanente medical facility, which is now the largest managed
care organization in the United States. The city of Fontana was incorporated on June 25, 1952.
The steel operation was closed in the 1980s; however, the city has since become a transportation
hub for trucking due to the number of highways that intersect in the area (Anicic 2005; City of
Fontana 2018).
1.3.1 Results of the Archaeological Records Search
An archaeological records search for a one-mile radius was completed by BFSA at the
SCCIC at CSU Fullerton. The SCCIC records search did not identify any resources within the
project; however, 19 resources, all of which are historic, are recorded within one mile of the project
(Table 1.3–1). Of the 19 resources, 16 are associated with the built environment, two are isolates,
and one is a highway marker.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–15
Table 1.3–1
Cultural Resources Located Within One Mile
of the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
Site Number(s) Resource Type
SBR- 2910H Historic highway (Route 66)
SBR-10,909H and SBR-29,864H Historic foundation(s) and trash scatter
P-36-012239 Historic Malaga Underpass Bridge Pumping
Station
P-36-015286 Historic commercial building
P-36-015289 Historic US Rabbit Experimental Station
P-36-015397 Historic Malaga Underpass Bridge
P-36-015497, SBR-15,272H, SBR-15,661H,
SBR-15,662H, SBR-15,664H, and SBR-15,665H Historic road
SBR-15,904H Historic Pacific Electric Railway alignment
P-36-020338 Historic single-family property
P-36-020708 Historic foundation
SBR-15,666H Historic highway marker
P-36-029863 and P-36-029865 Historic glass isolate
The records search results also indicated that a total of 20 cultural resources studies have
been conducted within one mile of the project. One of the previous studies overlaps the subject
property (Alexandrowicz et al. 1992). The Alexandrowicz et al. (1992) study consisted of a large
overview of the North Fontana Infrastructure Area that did not directly address the subject
property. Further, Alexandrowicz et al. (1992) did not identify any cultural resources within the
project.
In addition to requesting the archaeological records search from the SCCIC, BFSA
reviewed the following historic sources:
• The National Register of Historic Places Index
• The Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), Archaeological Determinations of
Eligibility
• The OHP, Built Environment Resources Directory
• Bureau of Land Management (BLM) General Land Office (GLO) Records
• 1896, 1898, 1901, and 1942 San Bernardino (15-minute) USGS maps
• 1943, 1953, and 1967 Fontana (7.5-minute) USGS maps
• Aerial photographs (1938 to 2025)
These sources did not indicate the presence of any archaeological resources within the
project. No structures have ever been mapped within the subject property, nor are any visible on
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–16
any of the aerial photographs. Additionally, no water drainages or freshwater resources are
mapped in the immediate vicinity of the project and no bedrock outcrops are visible on the aerial
photographs. According to the aerial imagery, the property was used agriculturally from at least
1938 to the 1960s. In the 1938 aerial photograph, trees lined the west and east boundaries of the
project. Subsequent photographs show the property remained vacant and undeveloped until the
present. Between 1976 and 1980, the properties to the north and south of the project were
developed as residential subdivisions. This pattern of residential development on surrounding
properties further intensified within the subsequent decades. Additionally, by 1980, Tokay and
Citrus avenues, portions of which comprise the west and east boundaries of the project, appear to
have been paved. By 1985, the trees lining the eastern boundary were removed. Further, by 2007,
all of the trees lining the western boundary were removed as well, resulting in the clearing of a
portion of the western half of the property. Aerial photographs from the early 2000s to the present
demonstrate that the property has been repeatedly cleared and disced in recent years.
1.3.2 Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search
At BFSA’s discretion, a SLF search was requested from the NAHC. This request is not
part of any Assembly Bill (AB) 52 Native American consultation. The NAHC SLF search results
were positive for recorded Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial
importance within the project. The NAHC suggested contacting the Gabrieleno Band of Mission
Indians/Kizh Nation and other local Native American groups for further information. This
additional outreach will be conducted by the lead agency under the official AB 52 Native American
consultation process. All correspondence can be found within Appendix C.
1.4 Applicable Regulations
Resource importance is assigned to districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that
possess exceptional value or quality illustrating or interpreting the heritage of San Bernardino
County in history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. A number of criteria are
used in demonstrating resource importance. Specifically, the criteria outlined in CEQA provide
the guidance for making such a determination, as provided below.
1.4.1 California Environmental Quality Act
According to CEQA (§15064.5a), the term “historical resource” includes the following:
1) A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources
Commission for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)
(Public Resources Code [PRC] SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR. Section 4850 et seq.).
2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section
5020.1(k) of the PRC or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting
the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the PRC, shall be presumed to be historically
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–17
or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant
unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or
culturally significant.
3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript, which a lead
agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural,
engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military,
or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided
the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the
whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agen cy to be
“historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR (PRC
SS5024.1, Title 14, Section 4852) including the following:
a) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;
b) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
c) 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
d) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history.
4) The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined eligible for listing in the CRHR,
not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1[k] of
the PRC), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section
5024.1[g] of the PRC) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the
resource may be a historical resource as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(j) or 5024.1.
According to CEQA (§15064.5b), a project with an effect that may cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant
effect on the environment. CEQA defines a substantial adverse change as:
1) Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means physical
demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate
surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially
impaired.
2) The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project:
a) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical
characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–18
that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the CRHR; or
b) 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 a
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,
c) 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 CRHR as determined by a lead
agency for purposes of CEQA.
Section 15064.5(c) of CEQA applies to effects upon archaeological sites and contains the
following additional provisions regarding archaeological sites:
1. When a project will impact an archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine
whether the site is a historical resource, as defined in subsection (a).
2. If a lead agency determines that the archaeological site is a historical resource, it shall
refer to the provisions of Section 21084.1 of the PRC, Section 15126.4 of the
guidelines, and the limits contained in Section 21083.2 of the PRC do not apply.
3. If an archaeological site does not meet the criteria defined in subsection (a), but does
meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource in Section 21083.2 of the PRC,
the site shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 21083.2. The time
and cost limitations described in PRC Section 21083.2(c-f) do not apply to surveys and
site evaluation activities intended to determine whether the project location contains
unique archaeological resources.
4. If an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor historical resource,
the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect
on the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are
noted in the Initial Study or Environmental Impact Report, if one is prepared to address
impacts on other resources, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA
process.
Section 15064.5(d-e) contains additional provisions regarding human remains. Regarding
Native American human remains, paragraph (d) provides:
(d) When an Initial Study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood of, Native
American human remains within the project, a lead agency shall work with the
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.0–19
appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC, as provided in PRC
SS5097.98. The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with
appropriate dignity, the human remains and any items associated with Native American
burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC. Action
implementing such an agreement is exempt from:
1) The general prohibition on disinterring, disturbing, or removing human remains
from any location other than a dedicated cemetery (Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5).
2) The requirements of CEQA and the Coastal Act.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2.0–1
2.0 STUDY OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of this study is to identify any cultural resources, should they exist,
within the project. For the current project, the study area under investigation is in the city of
Fontana in the southwestern portion of San Bernardino County. The scope of work for the cultural
resources study conducted for the project included the survey of the approximately 5.3-acre
property. Given the area involved, the research goals for this project are focused upon realistic
study options. Since the main objective of the investigation is to identify the presence of and
potential impacts to cultural resources, the goal is not necessarily to answer wide-reaching theories
regarding the development of early southern California, but to investigate the role and importance
of the identified resources. Nevertheless, the assessment of the significance of a resource must
take into consideration a variety of characteristics, as well as the ability of the resource to address
regional research topics and issues.
At the survey level, the principal research objective is a generalized investigation of
changing settlement patterns in both the prehistoric and historic periods within the study area. The
overall goal is to understand settlement and resource procurement patterns of the project area
occupants. Therefore, adequate information on site function, context, and chronology from an
archaeological perspective is essential for the investigation. The fieldwork and research were
undertaken with these primary research goals in mind:
1) To identify cultural resources occurring within the project;
2) To determine, if possible, site type and function, context of the deposit, and
chronological placement of each cultural resource identified;
3) To place each cultural resource identified within a regional perspective; and
4) To provide recommendations for the treatment of each of the cultural resources
identified.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.0–1
3.0 ANALYSIS OF PROJECT EFFECTS
The cultural resources study of the project consisted of an institutional records search and
an intensive cultural resource survey of the entire approximately 5.3-acre property. This study
was conducted in conformance with City of Fontana environmental requirements, Section 21083.2
of the California PRC, and CEQA. Statutory requirements of CEQA (Section 15064.5) were
followed for the identification and evaluation of resources. Specific definitions for an
archaeological resource type(s) used in this report are those established by the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO 1995).
3.1 Methods
The survey methodology employed during the current investigation followed standard
archaeological field procedures and was sufficient to accomplish a thorough assessment of the
project. The field methodology employed for the project included walking evenly spaced survey
transects set 10 meters apart while visually inspecting the ground surface. All potentially sensitive
areas where cultural resources might be located were closely inspected. Photographs documenting
overall survey conditions were taken frequently.
3.2 Results of the Field Survey
Field archaeologist Parker Sheriff conducted the pedestrian survey of the project on March
24, 2025. The survey was an intensive reconnaissance consisting of a series of transects across
the project. The project primarily consists of APN 1110-361-10 but also includes portions of the
sidewalk and paved roads along Tokay and Citrus avenues. At the time of the survey, the subject
property was vacant. Visibility within the project was characterized as moderate, at times being
hindered by vegetation. Vegetation consisted of non-native grasses and weeds. Plates 3.2‒1 and
3.2‒2 depict the conditions of the project at the time of the survey. According to the aerial
photographs, the property originally was utilized for agriculture since as early as 1938 and has
remained vacant for the past several decades. As such, no structures have ever been constructed
on the property. Other noted impacts to the property include modern trash scattered throughout
the site and a subsurface utility, possibly a PVC water line, in the southwest portion of the site.
The survey did not result in the identification of any historic or prehistoric cultural resources.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.0–2
Plate 3.2–1: Overview of the eastern half of the project, facing east.
Plate 3.2–2: Overview of the western half of the project, facing west.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4.0–1
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The cultural resources study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project did not locate any
cultural resources within the project. These findings are consistent with the records search results,
which found that the majority of the resources recorded within one mile of the property to be
associated with the built environment. The review of historic imagery indicates the property has
never contained any structures, having historically been utilized for agriculture. Furthermore, the
subject property has been cleared and disced numerous times in recent years. Given the lack of
historic development/occupation within the property, coupled with the survey results and previous
ground-disturbing clearing and discing activities, there is little to no potential for archaeological
resources to be encountered by the proposed project. As such, no further archaeological study or
monitoring of grading is recommended.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
5.0–1
5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED
The archaeological survey program for the project was directed by Principal Investigator
Tracy A. Stropes, M.A, RPA. The archaeological fieldwork was conducted by field archaeologist
Parker Sheriff. The report text was prepared by Kathleen Krogh and Tracy A. Stropes. Report
graphics were provided by Emily Soong. Technical editing and report production were conducted
by Payton Swanson. Emily Soong conducted the records search at the SCCIC at CSU Fullerton.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6.0–1
6.0 CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this archaeological report, and that the facts, statements, and
information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and have been
compiled in accordance with CEQA criteria as defined in Section 15064.5.
May 14, 2025
Tracy A. Stropes Date
Principal Investigator
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0–1
7.0 REFERENCES CITED
Alexandrowicz, Stephen J., Anne Q. Duffield-Stoll, Jeanette A. McKenna, Susan R.
Alexandrowicz, Arthur A. Kuhner, and Eric Scott
1992 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Investigations Within North Fontana
Infrastructure Area, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California.
Archaeological Consulting Services. Unpublished report on file at the South Central
Coastal Information Center at California State University at Fullerton, Fullerton,
California.
Ancestry.com
2009a 1860 United States Federal Census (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com
Operations, Inc.
2009b 1870 United States Federal Census (database online). Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com
Operations, Inc.
Anicic, John Charles, Jr.
1982 National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form, Fontana Farms
Company Ranch House, Camp #1 (Pepper Street House). Fontana Historical Society.
Form on file at the United States Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and
Recreation Service.
2005 Images of America: Fontana. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina;
Chicago, Illinois; Portsmouth, New Hampshire; and San Francisco, California.
Antevs, Ernst
1953 The Postpluvial or the Neothermal. University of California Archaeological Survey
Reports 22:9–23, Berkeley, California.
Bean, Lowell John and Charles R. Smith
1978a Gabrielino. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer. Handbook of North American
Indians, Vol. 8. William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C.
1978b Serrano. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians,
Vol. 8. William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
D.C.
Beattie, George W. and Helen P. Beattie
1939 Heritage of the Valley: San Bernardino’s First Century. Biobooks, Oakland,
California.
Benedict, Ruth Fulton
1924 A Brief Sketch of Serrano Culture. American Anthropologist 26(3).
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0–2
Brigandi, Phil
1998 Temecula: At the Crossroads of History. Heritage Media Corporation, Encinitas,
California.
Caughey, John W.
1970 California, A Remarkable State’s Life History. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey.
Chapman, Charles E.
1921 A History of California: The Spanish Period. The Macmillan Company, New York.
City of Fontana
2018 About the City of Fontana. Electronic document, https://www.fontana.org/255/About
-The-City-of-Fontana, accessed June 11, 2018.
Cook, Sherburne F.
1976 The Conflict Between the California Indian and White Civilization. University of
California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.
Cornford, Danial (editor)
1995 Working People of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles,
and Oxford, California.
Curray, Joseph R.
1965 Late Quaternary History: Continental Shelves of the United States. In Quaternary of
the United States, edited by H.E. Wright Jr. and D.G. Frey, pp. 723–735. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Drucker, Philip
1937 Culture Element Distributions: V. Southern California. Anthropological Records
1(1):1–52. University of California, Berkeley.
Engelhardt, Zephyrin
1921 San Luis Rey Mission, The King of the Missions. James M. Barry Company, San
Francisco, California.
Erlandson, Jon M. and Roger H. Colten (editors)
1991 An Archaeological Context for Archaeological Sites on the California Coast. In
Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California. Perspectives in California
Archaeology, Volume 1, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los
Angeles.
Fagan, B.
1991 Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent. Thames and Hudson.
London.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0–3
Gallegos, Dennis
1985 A Review and Synthesis of Environmental and Cultural Material for the Batiquitos
Lagoon Region. In San Diego State University Cultural Resource Management Casual
Papers 2(1).
2002 Southern California in Transition: Late Holocene Occupation of Southern San Diego
County. In Catalysts to Complexity: Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast,
edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Terry Jones. Institute of Archaeology, University of
California, Los Angeles.
Hall, William Hammond
1888 The Field, Water-Supply, and Works, Organization and Operation in San Diego, San
Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties: The Second Part of the Report of the State
Engineer of California on Irrigation and the Irrigation Question. State Office, J.D.
Young, Supt. State Printing, Sacramento.
Heizer, Robert F. (editor)
1978 Trade and Trails. In California, pp. 690–693. Handbook of North American Indians,
Vol. 8. William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
D.C.
Inman, Douglas L.
1983 Application of Coastal Dynamics to the Reconstruction of Paleocoastlines in the
Vicinity of La Jolla, California. In Quaternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology,
edited by Patricia M. Masters and N.C. Flemming. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando,
Florida.
Kroeber, A.L.
1976 Handbook of the Indians of California. Reprinted. Dover Editions, Dover
Publications, Inc., New York. Originally published 1925, Bulletin No. 78, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Martin, P.S.
1967 Prehistoric Overkill. In Pleistocene Extinctions: The Search for a Cause, edited by P.
Martin and H.E. Wright. Yale University Press: New Haven.
1973 The Discovery of America. Science 179(4077):969–974.
Masters, Patricia M.
1983 Detection and Assessment of Prehistoric Artifact Sites off the Coast of Southern
California. In Quaternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology: Towards the
Prehistory of Land Bridges and Continental Shelves, edited by P.M. Masters and N.C.
Flemming, pp. 189–213. Academic Press, London.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0–4
Miller, J.
1966 The Present and Past Molluscan Faunas and Environments of Four Southern
California Coastal Lagoons. Master’s thesis on file at the University of California at
San Diego, San Diego, California.
Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Morton, D.M. and F.K. Miller
2006 Geologic map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30' x 60' quadrangles, California:
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 06-1217, scale 1:100,000.
Moss, M.L. and J. Erlandson
1995 Reflections on North American Coast Prehistory. Journal of World Prehistory 9(1):1–
46.
National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2019 An online soil survey browser. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.
usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed September 2024.
Pourade, Richard F.
1961 Time of the Bells. In The History of San Diego 2. Union-Tribune Publishing
Company, San Diego, California.
1963 The Silver Dons. In The History of San Diego 3. Union-Tribune Publishing Company,
San Diego, California.
Reddy, Seetha
2000 Settling the Highlands: Late Holocene Highland Adaptations on Camp Pendleton, San
Diego County California. Prepared for the Army Corps of Engineers by ASM
Affiliates. Unpublished report on file at South Coastal Information Center at San Diego
State University, San Diego, California.
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1929 Field Notes, 1929 San Diego-Smithsonian Expedition. Manuscript on file at San Diego
Museum of Man.
Rolle, Andrew F.
1969 California: A History. 2nd ed. Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York.
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
1995 Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. Office of Historic Preservation,
Sacramento.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0–5
Strong, William Duncan
1971 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. Reprint of 1929 Publications in American
Archaeology and Ethnology No. 26, University of California, Berkeley.
University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections
2018 Pope & Talbot records, circa 1849-1975. Electronic file, http://archiveswest.orbis
cascade.org/ark:/80444/xv14450/pdf, accessed February 26, 2019.
Van Devender, T.R. and W.G. Spaulding
1979 Development of Vegetation and Climate in the Southwestern United States. Science
204:701–710.
Warren, Claude N. and M.G. Pavesic
1963 Shell Midden Analysis of Site SDI-603 and Ecological Implications for Cultural
Development of Batequitos Lagoon, San Diego County, Los Angeles. University of
California, Los Angeles, Archaeological Survey Annual Report, 1960-1961:246-338.
Wirths, Todd A.
2025 Paleontological Assessment for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project, City of
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. BFSA Environmental Services, a
Perennial Company. Unpublished report on file at BFSA Environmental Services, a
Perennial Company, Poway, California.
World Forestry Center
2017 Andrew Jackson Pope (1820-1978). Electronic document, https://www.worldforestry
.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/POPE-ANDREW-JACKSON.pdf, accessed
February 26, 2019.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX A
Resumes of Key Personnel
Tracy A. Stropes, MA, RPA
Vice President of Cultural Resources/ Principal Archaeologist
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company
14010 Poway Road Suite A
Phone: (858) 484-0915 Fax: (858) 679-9896 Email: tstropes@bfsa.perennialenv.com
Education
Master of Arts, Anthropology, San Diego State University, California 2007
Bachelor of Science, Anthropology, University of California, Riverside 2000
Professional Memberships
Register of Professional Archaeologists
Society for California Archaeology
Archaeological Institute of America
Association of Oregon Archaeologists
Experience
Vice President of Cultural Resources/Principal Archaeologist March 2009–Present
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company
Poway, California
Tracy A. Stropes has over 33 years of experience in cultural resource management, with experience in
project management, report authorship, lithic analysis, laboratory management, Native American
consultation, and technical report editing for numerous projects throughout the western United States.
Mr. Stropes has conducted cultural resource surveys, archaeological site testing and evaluations for
National Register eligibility and CEQA compliance, mitigation of resources through data recovery for
archaeological sites, budget and report preparation, and direction of crews of all sizes for projects
ranging in duration from a single-day site visit to multiple years. Mr. Stropes is a Registered Professional
Archaeologist (RPA) and is on the list of archaeological consultants qualified to conduct archaeological
investigations in the city and county of San Diego, county of Riverside, State of Oregon, State of
Arizona, and on Arizona and California BLM lands. He has served as project archaeologist for hundreds
of projects and composed data recovery and preservation programs for sites throughout the western
United States for both CEQA- and NEPA-level compliance.
Archaeological Principal Investigator June 2008–February 2009
TRC Solutions Irvine, California
Cultural resource segment of Natural Sciences and Permitting Division; management of archaeological
investigations for private companies and local, state, and federal agencies, personnel management,
field and laboratory supervision, lithic analysis, Native American consultation and reporting, NRHP and
CEQA site evaluations, and authoring/coauthoring cultural resource management reports.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 2
Principal Investigator and Project Archaeologist June 2006–May 2008
Archaeological Resource Analysts Oceanside, California
As a sub consultant, served as Principal Investigator and Project Archaeologist for several projects for
SRS Inc., including field direction, project and personnel management, lab analysis, and authorship of
company reports.
Project Archaeologist September 1996–June 2006
Gallegos & Associates Carlsbad, California
Project management, laboratory management, lithic analysis, field direction, Native American
consultation, report authorship/technical editing, and composition of several data
recovery/preservation programs for both CEQA and NEPA level compliance.
Project Archaeologist September 1993–September 1996
Macko Inc. Santa Ana, California
Project management, laboratory management, lithic analysis, field supervision, and report
authorship/technical editing.
Archaeological Field Technician January 1993–September 1993
Chambers Group Inc. Irvine, California
Archaeological excavation, surveying, monitoring, wet screen facilities management, and project
logistics.
Archaeological Field Technician May 1992–September 1992
John Minch and Associates San Juan Capistrano, California
Archaeological excavation, surveying, monitoring, wet screen facilities management, and project
logistics.
Selected Reports/Papers
Principal Author
2023 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for the Oak Creek Canyon Project, City of Wildomar,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for Ambient Pacific OCC, LLC.
2023 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for The Questhaven 76 Project, San Diego County,
California (APNs 223-070-007, 223-070-008, and 223-080-046). Prepared for ColRich.
2023 A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Bermuda Dunes Self Storage Project, PAR220053,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for FAMA Dairy.
2023 A Cultural Resources Study for 4846 Pacifica Drive, City of San Diego. Prepared for Colliers
International.
2023 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historical Resources Study for the Maison’s Sierra Project, City of Lancaster,
California (Tract No. 27099). Prepared for Ravello Holdings, Inc.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 3
2023 Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation Program for the Omni Hotel Driving Range/Parking Lot
Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for TRT Holdings, Inc.
2022 A Class III Historic Resources Study for the Anna Avenue Project for Section 106 Compliance, City
of San Diego, California. Prepared for John Smith Earthworks, Inc.
2022 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for the Grand Avenue Project, Riverside County,
California (APN 379-060-005). Prepared for TriPointe Homes
2022 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Boulder Springs North Project, Riverside
County, California (TTMs 31243, 31244, and 31245; APNs 321-020-027, -028, -029, and -030 and 321-
130-047 and -048). Prepared for KB Home.
2022 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historical Resources Study for the Alpine Rancho Palo Verde Project, San
Diego County, California (SPL-219-00698-CJA). Prepared for Schindler Real Estate Services, Inc.
2022 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for the Cumming Ranch Project, San Diego County,
California (APNs 282-010-08, -30, -34, and -43; 283-011-06; 283-021-01 and -02; 283-022-02; 283-041-
25 and -26; and 283-051-01). Prepared for 805 Properties.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Gatchell Road Project, San Diego County,
California (Project No. 100203). Prepared for the National Park Service.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for Site CA-SDI-11,934/H, San Diego County,
California (APN 532-520-15). Prepared for the National Park Service.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historical Resources Study for the Renaissance Ranch Project, Riverside
County, California (SPL-2004-01431-JPL). Prepared for Richland Developers, Inc.
2021 A Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for the Coppel Remodel & Addition Project, La Jolla, California.
Prepared for Marengo Morton Architects, Inc.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for CAB-20-1, San Diego County, California (APN
532-520-15). Prepared for the National Park Service.
2021 Cultural Resources Study for 7951 Paseo Del Ocaso, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Aidlin Darling
Design.
2021 Cultural Resources Study for the Secret Hills Ranch Project, San Diego County, California (PDS2020-
LDGRMJ-30253, APN 520-060-18)
2021 Cultural Resources Study for the UCLA Cedar Suites and Willow Creek Staff Housing Project, Lake
Arrowhead, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for CA-SDI-13,884, San Diego County, California
(APN 532-520-13). Prepared for the National Park Service.
2021 A Cultural Resources Study for the UCLA Glamping Facility Project, Lake Arrowhead, San
Bernardino County, California. Prepared for UCLA Capital Programs.
2021 Archaeological Test Results for 2596 Chalcedony Street, San Diego, California. Prepared for
Colliers International.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 4
2021 Cultural Resources Study for the 12247 Elliott Avenue Project, Los Angeles County, California.
Prepared for EPD Solutions.
2021 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Roquet Ranch Project, City of Colton, San
Bernardino County, California (Tentative Tract Map No. 19983; APNs 116-701-101, -102, 116-702-101,
-105, -121, -122, -123, and 116-703-118). Prepared for Sunmeadows, LLC.
2020 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historical Resources Study for the Ocean Breeze Ranch Project, Bonsall, San
Diego County, California (SPL-2020-00176). Prepared for Ocean Breeze Ranch, LLC.
2020 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Encinitas Beach Hotel Project, Encinitas, California.
Prepared for JMI Realty, LLC
2020 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Pacifica Estates Project, Fallbrook, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Jose Islas.
2020 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Hidden Valley Ranch Project, SPL-2004-
01124, City of Poway, California. Prepared for Barbara Malone.
2020 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for The Farms in Poway Project, Poway, San Diego
County, California (APNs 273-110-070, -080, and -180). Prepared for Kevin McNamara.
2020 A Phase I and II Cultural Resources Assessment for the Hansen Lot Split Project, TPM 37655, Riverside
County, California. Prepared for Forest Hansen.
2020 Cultural Resources Study for the West Coast Cold Storage Project, City of Jurupa Valley, County of
Riverside (APNs 178-140-010 and -018). Prepared for
2020 Cultural Resources Study for the 340 East Bradley Avenue Project, San Diego County, California
(PDS2021-LDGRMJ-30346). Prepared for A N1-Mart, LLC.
2019 Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Atwell Phase 1A Project (formerly Butterfield Specific
Plan), City of Banning, Riverside County, California. Prepared for Pardee Homes.
2019 A Cultural Resource Assessment for the Glen Circle Project, Poway, California. Prepared for MDD
Homes.
2019 Cultural Resources Survey for the Highlands at Warner Springs and Off-Site Fire Access Road
Project, Warner Springs, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Warner Springs Estates, LLC.
2019 A Cultural Resources Assessment for the 8801 East Marginal Way Project, City of Tukwila, King
County, Washington. Prepared for CenterPoint Properties Trust.
2019 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the 7980 Park Village Road Emergency Repair Project, San
Diego, California. Prepared for Orion Construction Corporation.
2019 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Harmony Grove Village, San Diego County,
California. Prepared for Lennar – San Diego Division.
2019 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Price-Cohen Residence Project, 2045 Lowry Place, La
Jolla, California 92037. Prepared for Lena Price and Thomas Cohen.
2019 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Melrose Drive Widening Project, City of
Oceanside, California. Prepared for California West Communities.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 5
2019 A Cultural Resources Study for the Majestic Chino Heritage Project, City of Chino, San Bernardino
County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2019 Cultural Resources Study for the Ocean Breeze Ranch Project, Bonsall, San Diego County,
California. Prepared for Ocean Breeze Ranch, LLC.
2019 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Arthofer Residence Project, 1890 Viking Way,
La Jolla, California. Prepared for Frank and Sharon Arthofer.
2019 A Phase I and II Cultural Resources Assessment for the Greentree Ranch Project, Riverside County,
California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2018 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Escondido Country Club Project, SPL-2018-
00135-CJA, City of Escondido, California. Prepared for New Urban West, Inc.
2018 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the North County Plaza Project, Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for Planning Systems, Inc.
2018 Cultural Resources Addendum Report for the Ivey Palms Project, Thousand Palms, Riverside,
California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2017 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Altman Residence Project, 9696 La Jolla Farms Road,
La Jolla, California 92037. Prepared for Steve and Lisa Altman.
2017 Cultural Resources Study for the Escondido Country Club Project, City of Escondido, California.
Prepared for New Urban West, Inc.
2017 A Class III Archaeological Study for the Tract 28859 Project for Section 106 Compliance. Prepared
for Menifee 28859, LLC.
2016 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resources Study for the Lake Ranch Project, TR 36730, Riverside
County, California.
2016 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Imperial Beach Bikeway Village Project, 536
13th Street and 535 Florence Street, Imperial Beach, California. Prepared for Bikeway Village, LLC.
2015 Cultural Resource Data Recovery and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Site SDI-10,237 Locus F,
Everly Subdivision Project, El Cajon, California. Prepared for Shea Homes.
2015 A Class III Historic Resource Study for the Miramar Clearwell Improvements Project, San Diego,
California. Prepared for Global Environmental Permitting, Inc.
2015 A Class III Historic Resource Study for the College Boulevard Project, Carlsbad, California. Prepared
for Bent West, LLC.
2015 A Class III Archaeological Study for the Parkside Project for Section 106 Compliance, Riverside
County, California. Prepared for Lennar Corporation.
2015 A Cultural Resource Assessment for the Zhao Residence Project, Poway, California (275-240-66).
Prepared for Pacific Sotheby’s International Realty.
2014 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Utah Trail Project, County of San Bernardino, California
(APNs 621-281-22 through 621-281-25). Prepared for Ecos Energy, LLC.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 6
2014 Phase I Archaeological Assessment for the Sky Canyon Project (PP25309), Riverside County,
California. Prepared for Rocky Snider California Project Management Office.
2014 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Shoshone Valley Road Project, County of San Bernardino,
California (APNs 613-233-01, -02, -03, -04, -27, -28, -29, and -30). Prepared for Ecos Energy, LLC.
2014 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Nuevo 055 Project, Community of Nuevo, County of
Riverside. Prepared for Ecos Energy, LLC.
2014 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Bourgeoios Project, Poway, California. Prepared for Bill
Yen & Associates, Inc.
2014 A Cultural Resources Survey for the Aliso Canyon Major Subdivision Project, Rancho Santa Fe, San
Diego County, California. Prepared for Zephyr Partners.
2014 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sewer Group 723 Project, San Diego, California.
Prepared for
Ortiz Corporation.
2013 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Rogers Tierra Bonita Project, Poway, California. Prepared
for John D. Fitch & Associates.
2013 A Cultural Resource Assessment Update for the Girard Townhome Project, TR 35477, Riverside
County, California. Prepared for G8 Development, Inc.
2013 Phase I Archaeological Assessment for the Ridge Park Project, City of Temecula, California.
Prepared for Ambient Communities.
2013 A Phase I and Phase II Cultural Resource Study for the Citrus Heights/Fairway Drive Project,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for CV Communities.
2013 Phase I Archaeological Assessment for the Bixby Highgrove Project (TTM 36437), Riverside
County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2013 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for the Ramona Ranch Affordable Housing Project for Section
106 Compliance, San Diego County, California. Prepared for AMCAL Multi-Housing, Inc.
2013 Phase I Archaeological Assessment for the Yates Road Project (TTM 36437), Riverside County,
California. Prepared for CV Communities, LLC.
2013 A Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation Program for the Warner Ranch Project, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for HP Warner Ranch, LP.
2013 A Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment for TPM 36585, Riverside County, California. Prepared for
GF Real Estate Services.
2013 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for TR 31597 and TR 32627, Riverside County, California.
Prepared for Standard Pacific Homes.
2013 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Sunny Cal Project, City of Beaumont, County of Riverside.
Prepared for CV Communities, LLC.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 7
2013 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for The Sierra Bella Project for Section 106 Compliance,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for Forestar Corona, LLC.
2013 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for the Moosa Creek Mitigation Bank Project. Prepared for a
Creek LLC.
2013 Archaeological Survey of the Rohmiller Residence for a Bulletin 560 Permit Application, 2350 Calle
De La Garza, La Jolla, California 92037 (APN 346-180-22). Prepared for Architect Mark D. Lyon,
Inc.
2013 Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation Program for the Oak Creek Project, City of Escondido,
California. Prepared for New Urban West, Inc.
2013 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Hope Harbor Project, Riverside County, California.
Prepared for Medhat Rofael.
2013 Archaeological Survey of the Liske Residence, La Jolla, California. Prepared for ECEGC Inc.
2013 An Updated Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for Tentative Tract Maps Nos. 36484 and 36485,
Audie Murphy Ranch. Prepared for Brookfield Residential.
2013 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study For the 401 West Ash Street Project San Diego, California.
Prepared for PierPoint Legacy Holdings, LLC.
2013 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Ten on Columbia Project, San Diego, California. Prepared for
InDev, Inc.
2013 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Washington Avenue Project, City of Murrieta, California.
Prepared for Coastal Land Solutions.
2012 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Wildomar 23 Project, Riverside County, California.
Prepared for Lennar.
2012 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for the USGS Creepmeter Project. Prepared for Bureau of Land
Management, El Centro Office.
2012 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the for the Johnston Residence Project, La Jolla, California.
Prepared for Heather Johnston.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Howell Residence Project, Poway, California. Prepared
for Cal Howell.
2012 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sewer and Water Group 799 Project. Prepared for
Burtech Pipeline.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study For the Villa Hermosa Project San Diego, California. Prepared
for David Chow.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Payan Property Project, San Diego, California. Prepared
for Landmark Engineering.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the El Camino Real Widening Project, Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for Planning Systems.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 8
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Encore Trust Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for
Metcalf Development and Consulting.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Andres Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Engineering Design Group.
2012 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Diamond Springs Project, Riverside County, California.
Prepared for Benjamin J. Stables III, B 3 Consulting.
2012 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the ActivCare at Mission Bay Project, San Diego, California.
Prepared for ActivCare Living, Inc.
2012 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Water Group 790 Project, City of San Diego, California.
Prepared for Orion Construction Corporation.
2012 Results of the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Mission Brewery Villas Project, City of San
Diego, California. Prepared for Eilar Associates, Inc.
2012 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Gatto Residence Project, La Jolla, California.
Prepared for Marengo Morton Architects Inc.
2012 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Sunset Cliffs Trunk Sewer Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for KTA Construction.
2012 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Sewer Group 682M Project, City of San Diego, California.
Prepared for BRH Garver.
2012 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Pelberg Residence Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for Linda and Art Pelberg.
2012 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Rose Creek Bikeway Bridge Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for Flatiron West, Inc.
2011 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the South Mission Valley Trunk Sewer Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for HPS Mechanical, Inc.
2011 A Class III Cultural Resources Study for the La Dama de Oro Project, San Bernardino County,
California. Prepared for Mohave Gold Mining & Exploration, Inc.
2011 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Jacobs Health Care Facility Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for Jacobs Health Care, LLC.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study For the Rowland Auto Dismantling Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for David Rowland.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Dye Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for
Eric Dye.
2011 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Santa Rosa Academy Project, Riverside County,
California. Prepared for Santa Rosa Academy Charter School c/o Bradley Burke Competitive
Edge Development, LLC.
2011 Cultural Resource Data Recovery Study for SDI-4606 Locus B for Saint Gabriel’s Catholic Church,
Poway, California. Prepared for Saint Gabriel’s Catholic Church.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 9
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Nooren Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Jack Nooren.
2011 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Sewer and Water Group 768 Project, City of San Diego,
California. Prepared for Ortiz Corporation.
2011 Cultural Resource Test for the 10th Avenue Parking Lot Project, City of San Diego, California.
Prepared for 11th and B Investment Associates, LLC.
2011 A Cultural Resources Study for the Ampudia Lot Project, City of San Diego, California. Prepared for
Venture Pacific Commercial Services, Inc.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Hyde Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Paul and Denise Hyde.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Fialko Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Thomas Armstrong Construction, Inc.
2011 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the Sewer Group 682M Project, City of San Diego, California.
Prepared for HTA Engineering & Construction Inc.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Butterfield Residence Project, La Jolla, California.
Prepared for Geotechnical Exploration, Inc.
2011 A Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Eichen Residence Project, San Diego, California.
Prepared for Steigerwald-Dougherty, Inc.
2011 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Galway Downs Project, Riverside County, California.
Prepared for Trip Hord.
2011 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for Rancho Bella Vista Phase IV (TR 31871), Riverside County,
California. Prepared for Lennar Inland Division.
2011 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Salvation Army Vehicle Storage Area Demolition
Project. Prepared for The Salvation Army General Counsel.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Kates Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Brad and Shannon Kates.
2011 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Kralik Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for John Kralik.
2010 An Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Cricket Cell Tower Project (Permit # 3399 06-032), San
Diego County, California. Prepared for Ken Hayes.
2010 A Cultural Resources Study for the 47th Street Warehouse Project City of San Diego, California,
Project No. 190957. Prepared for 47th Street Properties.
2010 A Cultural Resource Study for the Dickenson Ranch Project, San Bernardino County, California.
Prepared for Dickenson and Son Property Management and Investments.
2010 A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Young Family Trust Lot Split Project City of Escondido,
California. Prepared for Young Family Trust.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 10
2010 An Archaeological Monitoring Report for the Jamul Rural Fire Station Auxiliary Access Road
Project, San Diego County, California. Prepared for TCB.
2010 Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation Program for the Citracado Parkway Extension Project,
City of Escondido, California. Prepared for AECOM.
2010 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the Sycamore Creek Specific Plan No. 256 Amendment No.
2, Riverside County, California. Prepared for T&B Planning.
2010 A Phase III Cultural Resource Data Recovery Program for CA-SDI-16,986, Hidden Meadows, San
Diego County, California (TPM 20794). Tuscan Ridge, LLC.
2010 Historic Properties Treatment Plan for the Talega (64 Area) 12kV Conversion Project Marine Corps
Base Camp Pendleton San Diego County California. Prepared for Synergy Electric Company, Inc.
2010 A Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation Program for the Highlands at Warner Springs Project,
Warner Springs, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Warner Springs Estates, LLC.
2010 A Cultural Resources Literature Review for the 11099 North Torrey Pines Road Project, San Diego,
California. Prepared for Touchstone Investments.
2010 A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey for the San Jacinto Poultry Ranch Storage Building Project, San
Jacinto, California. Prepared for Moark, LLC.
2010 A Phase III Cultural Resource Data Recovery Program for SDI-16986, Hidden Meadows, San Diego,
California (TPM 20794). Prepared for Tuscan Ridge, LLC.
2010 Cultural Resources Study for the Dos Colinas Project, Carlsbad, California. Prepared for Dos
Colinas, LLC.
2010 A Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Greater Alpine Fire Safe Council Horsethief Vegetation
Management Project. Prepared for the Greater Alpine Fire Safe Council.
2010 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Moses Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Brian Moses.
2010 Pottery Canyon Site Archaeological Evaluation Project City of San Diego, California. Prepared for
the City of San Diego Park and Recreation Department.
2010 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Shabaz Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared
for Negar Shabaz.
2009 A Phase I Cultural Resources Study for the Kramer 453 Project, San Bernardino County, California.
Prepared for LightSource Renewables LLC.
2009 A Cultural Resources Study for the Hronopoulus Residence Project, City of San Diego, California.
Prepared for Andreas Hronopoulus.
2009 A Cultural Resources Monitoring Report for the East Point Loma Trunk Sewer Project, San Diego,
California. Prepared for Southern California Soil and Testing.
2009 A Cultural Resources Study for the McKean SDP Project. San Diego, California.
2009 An Archaeological Assessment for the Rivera-Placentia Project, City of Riverside, California.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 11
Prepared for Riverside Construction Company.
2009 Cultural Resource Data Recovery Plan for the North Ocean Beach Gateway Project. Prepared
for the City of San Diego and KTU+A.
2009 Cultural Resource Letter Report for the Borrego Substation Feasibility Study, Borrego Springs,
California. Prepared for RBF Consulting.
2009 A Cultural Resource Study for the Gatto Residence Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for
Marengo Martin Architects Inc.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the Central Feeder Connection Project, San Bernardino, California.
Prepared for Albert A. Webb and Associates.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the Clay Street Connection Project, Riverside, California. Prepared
for Albert A. Webb and Associates.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the Green Hills Project, San Diego County, California. Prepared for
Atlas Investments, LLC.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the La Sierra Pipeline Project, Riverside, California. Prepared for
Albert A. Webb and Associates.
2009 Cultural Resources Monitoring Report for the East Point Loma Trunk Sewer Project. Prepared for
Southern California Soil & Testing.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the Mockingbird Connection Project, Riverside, California.
Prepared for Albert A. Webb and Associates.
2009 A Cultural Resource Report for the Mesquite Lake Treatment Plan Project, Imperial County,
California. Prepared for Albert A. Webb and Associates.
2008 Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for the 28220 Highridge Road Development Project, Rancho
Palos Verdes, California. Prepared for REC Development.
2008 Wild Goose Expansion 3 Project Butte County, California Colusa County, California. Prepared for
Niska Gas Storage LLC.
2008 Class III Cultural Resource Survey for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Four Railway Bridge Renewal
Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for BNSF Railway Company.
2008 I-80 Colfax Site Cultural Resource Records Search Report, Placer County, California. Prepared
for Granite Construction Company.
2008 I-80 Gold Run Site Cultural Resource Records Search Report, Placer County, California. Prepared
for Granite Construction Company.
2008 Cultural Resource Monitoring at 31431 Camino Capistrano, San Juan Capistrano, California.
Prepared for Herman Weissker, Inc.
2008 Cultural Resource Inventory for the Snow White Pumice Mine, Hinkley, California. Prepared for U.S.
Mining and Minerals Corporation.
2007 Nodule Industries of North Coastal San Diego: Change and Stasis in 10,000 Years of Lithic
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 12
Technology. Masters thesis on file, San Diego State University.
2007 Cultural Resource Inventory for Empire Homes (APN 104-180-04), Lake Forest, California. Prepared
for Empire Homes.
2007 Phase I Archaeological Assessment for APN 104-200-09, Beaumont, California. Prepared for Mary
Chan.
2007 Cultural Resource Inventory for Empire Homes (APN 104-180-04), Lake Forest, California. Prepared
for Empire Homes.
2006 Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course Data Recovery Program for CA-SDI-8694, and Indexing and
Preservation Program Study for CA-SDI-8303 and CA-SDI-8797 Locus C, City of Carlsbad,
California. Prepared for City of Carlsbad.
2005 Grand Pacific Resorts Data Recovery and Index Sample Program for CA-SDI-8797, Area A, City
of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for Grand Pacific Resorts Inc.
2004 "Near the Harris Site Quarry" Cultural Resource Data Recovery and Preservation Program for CA-
SDI-13028, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Harbrecht Development, L.P.
2004 Cultural Resource Survey and Boundary Test Report for the Lilac Ranch Project, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Empire Companies.
2003 Cultural Resource Data Recovery and Preservation Program for CA-SDI-12027, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Harbrecht Development Inc.
2002 Data Recovery Program for the Pacbell Site CA-SDI-5633, San Marcos, California. Prepared for
Joseph Wong Design Associates.
2001 McCrink Ranch Cultural Resource Test Program Additional Information for Selected Sites, San
Diego County, California. Prepared for Shapouri & Associates.
2001 The Quail Ridge Project Cultural Resource Test Program, San Diego County, California. Prepared
for Helix Environmental Planning, Inc.
2000 Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the North Sand Sheet Full Buildout Program, Owens
Lake, California. Prepared for CH2MHill.
1995 Final Report: Archaeological Investigations Conducted for the Abalone Cove Dewatering Wells,
City of Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes, Environmental Services.
1995 Final Report: A Class III Intensive Survey of a 100-Acre Sand and Gravel Mining Area, Imperial
County, California. Prepared for the Lilburn Corporation.
1994 Final Report: Data Recovery Excavations at Five Late Prehistoric Archaeological Sites Along the
Los Trancos Access Road, Newport Coast Planned Community, Orange County, California.
Prepared for the Coastal Community Builders, a division of The Irvine Company.
Contributing Author
2019 Cultural Resources Study for the 3868-3900 Sepulveda Boulevard Project, City of Culver City, Los
Angeles County, California. Prepared for Sepulveda Suites, Inc.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 13
2019 Final Archaeological Data Recovery and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Westin Hotel and
Timeshare Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc.
2019 Cultural Resources Study for the Commerce Logistics Center Project, 5200 Sheila Street,
Commerce, California 90040. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2019 A Section 106 (NHPA) Historic Resource Study for the McElwain Project (SPL-2019-00565), Murrieta,
Riverside County, California. Prepared for Murrieta Development II, LLC.
2019 Phase II Cultural Resource Study for the McElwain Project, City of Murrieta, California. Prepared
for Murrieta Development II, LLC.
2018 A Phase I and II Cultural Resources Assessment for the Emerald Acres Project, Winchester,
Riverside County. Prepared for T&B Planning, Inc.
2018 A Cultural Resources Monitoring Report for the Golden City Project, Tracts 28532-1, -2, -3, -4, and
-5 and Tract 34445, City of Murrieta, California. Prepared for North Murrieta Community, LLC.
2018 An Archaeological/Historical Study for the Citracado Business Park West Project, City of
Escondido. Prepared for Pacific Harmony Grove Development.
2015 Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation Program for the Westin Hotel and Timeshare Project,
City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc.
2015 A Class III Cultural Resource Study for the Habitat for Humanity Project, Perris, California. Habitat
for Humanity Inland Valley.
2015 A Phase II Cultural Resource Assessment for the Munro Valley Solar Project, Inyo County, California.
Prepared for Prepared for Ecos Energy, LLC.
2014 An Extended Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment for the Belvedere-Webster Project, City of
Poway, California (APN 323-010-26-00). Prepared for Webster Realty Group.
2014 Cultural Resources Study for the Brook Forest Conservation Bank Project, Valley Center, San
Diego County, California. Prepared for Brook Forest, LLC.
2014 A Phase I Cultural Resource Study for the Crystal View Lane Project, Poway, California. Prepared
for Mark Catrambone.
2014 Cultural Resource Assessment for the Muscat Project, Poway, California (TPM 13-002; APN 278-
180-44). Prepared for Mr. Ed Muscat.
2014 An Extended Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment for the Mulholland Highway Improvement
Project, Cities of Calabasas and Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. City of Calabasas
Public Works Department.
2014 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the 9th and Broadway Project, City of San Diego. Prepared for
Bridge Housing Corporation.
2013 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Cisterra Sempra Tower Project San Diego, California.
Prepared for Eilar Associates, Inc.
2013 A Section 106 (NHPA) Cultural Resources Study for the Toscana Project, Riverside County,
California. Prepared for Forestar Toscana, LLC.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 14
2013 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Gaslamp Hotel Project. Prepared for The Robert Green
Company.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Pinnacle International 15th and Island Project. Prepared for
Pinnacle International.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Horton Plaza Park Improvement Project. Prepared for the City
of San Diego.
2012 Mitigation Monitoring Report for the T-Mobile West, LLC Telecommunications Candidate
SD02867C (Presidio Park). Prepared for Michael Brandman Associates.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Old Police Headquarters Project. Prepared for Terramar Retail
Centers.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Knight Residence Project. Prepared for Mr. Dennis Knight.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the 9th and Broadway Project. Prepared for Bridge Housing
Corporation.
2012 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Blue Sky Project. Prepared for Gray Development.
2011 An Archaeological Study for 1887 Viking Way Project, La Jolla, California. Prepared for Island
Architects.
2011 A Cultural Resource Evaluation Program for the Otay Hills Quarry Project, San Diego County,
California, Log No. 93-19-006J; P04-004; RPO4-001. Prepared for EnviroMINE.
2010 A Cultural Resource Evaluation Program for the Batchelder Lot Split Project, San Diego County,
California, TPM 21177; KIVA PROJECT 10-0125593; APNs 247-010-10, -13. Prepared for David
Batchelder.
2010 A Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation Program for the Butterfield Trails Ranch Project,
Valley Center, San Diego County, California, TM 5551, P 08-028, GPA 06-007, REZ 06-010, LOG NO.
06-08-033. Prepared for Wayne B. Hilbig.
2008 Lithic Analysis for Thirteen Sites Along the Transwestern Phoenix Expansion Project, Loops A and B.
Prepared for Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC.
2005 Cultural Resource Survey and Testing for the Star Ranch Property, San Diego, California.
2004 Cultural Resource Test Report for the Palomar Point Project: Site CA-SDI-16205, Carlsbad,
California. Prepared for Lanikai Management Corp.
2004 Cultural Resource Survey and Test Report for the Canyon View Project, Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for Shapouri & Associates.
2004 Cultural Resource Test Report for the Yamamoto Property: Site SDM-W-2046, Carlsbad,
California. Prepared for Cunningham Consultants, Inc.
2004 Historical Resources Report for the Kuta and Mascari Properties, Otay Mesa, California. Prepared
for Centex Homes.
2004 Cultural Resource Monitor and Test Report for the Encina Power Plant Project, Carlsbad,
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 15
California. Prepared for Haley & Aldrich, Inc.
2004 Cultural Resource Test Report for Site CA-SDI-16788, Otay Mesa, California. Prepared for Otay
Mesa Property, L.P.
2004 Cultural Resource Survey and Test Report for the Lonestar Project, Otay Mesa, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Otay Mesa Property, L.P.
2003 Cultural Resource Mitigation Program for the Torrey Ranch Site CA-SDI-5325, San Diego,
California. Prepared for Garden Communities.
2003 Cultural Resource Survey and Test Report for the Johnson Canyon Parcel, Otay Mesa, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Otay Mesa Property, L.P.
2002 Cultural Resource Data Recovery Plan for the Shaw Project: Sites CA-SDI-13025 and CA-SDI-
13067, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Shapouri & Associates.
2001 Archaeological Test Program for CA-SDI-14112 Mesa Norte Project, San Diego, California.
Prepared for Hunsaker & Associates.
2001 The Vista-Oceanside Cultural Resource Survey and Test Program, Vista, California. Prepared for
Shapouri & Associates.
2001 Cultural Resource Test Program for the Wilson Property, Carlsbad, California. Prepared for the
City of Carlsbad.
2001 Cultural Resource Test Plan for the Oceanside-Escondido Project, County of San Diego,
California. Prepared for Dudek & Associates.
2001 Cultural Resource Test Program for the Kramer Junction Expansion Project Adelanto, California.
Prepared for AMEC.
2001 Cultural Resource Test Program for CA-SDI-12508 San Diego, California (LDR No. 99-1331).
Prepared for Garden Communities.
2000 Archaeological Testing of Prehistoric Sites CASDI-14115 and CA-SDI-14116 for The Mesa Grande
Project, San Diego, California. Prepared for Solana Mesa Partners, LLC.
2000 Cultural Resource Survey and Test Report for the Wetmore Property, Otay Mesa, San Diego
County, California. Prepared for Mr. Andy Campbell.
2000 The Torrey Ranch Cultural Resource Test Program, San Diego County, California. Prepared for
Garden Communities.
2000 Cultural Resource Test Results for the Otay Mesa Generating Project. Prepared for the California
Energy Commission and Otay Mesa Generating Company, LCC.
2000 The Eternal Hills Cultural Resource Survey and Test Program, City of Oceanside, California.
Prepared for Eternal Hills Memorial Park.
2000 The Quail Ridge Cultural Resource Test Program, San Diego County, California. Prepared for
Helix Environmental Planning Inc.
2000 Cultural Resource Testing Program for CA-SDI-5652/H and CA-SDI-9474H SR 78/Rancho Del Oro
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 16
Interchange Project, Oceanside, California. Prepared for Tetratech Inc.
2000 Cultural Resource Test Results for a Portion of CA-SDI-8654 (Kuebler Ranch) Otay Mesa, San
Diego County, California. Prepared for Shapouri & Associates.
2000 Historical/Archaeological Monitoring and Data Recovery Program for Prehistoric Site CA-SDI-48,
Locus C Naval Base Point Loma, San Diego, California. Prepared for Department of the Navy,
Southwest Division.
2000 Cultural Resource Evaluation Report for the Palomar College Science Building Project, San
Marcos, California. Prepared for Parsons Engineering Science Inc.
1999 Cultural Resource Monitoring Report for the Village of Ystagua Water Main Break City of San
Diego, California. Prepared for the City of San Diego Water Department.
1999 The Effect of Projectile Point Size on Atlatl Dart Efficiency in Lithic Technology Vol. 24, No 1 p (27-
37).
1999 Cultural Resource Evaluation Report for the Oceanside-Escondido Bikeway Project, San Marcos,
California. Prepared for City of San Marcos.
1999 5000 Years of Occupation: Cultural Resource Inventory and Assessment Program for the
Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course Project City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared or
Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc.
1999 Silver Oaks Estates Cultural Resource Enhanced Survey and Test Report for a Portion of CA-SDI-
7202 San Diego, California. Prepared for Helix Environmental Planning Inc.
1999 Historical Archaeological Test of a portion of CA-SDI-8303 for the Faraday Road Extension
Carlsbad, California. Prepared for the City of Carlsbad.
1999 Cultural Resource Literature Review for the North Coast Transportation Study Arterial Streets
Alternative San Diego County, California. Prepared for MLF/San Diego Association of Govt.
1998 Archaeological Test Report for a Portion of CA-SDI-9115/SDM-W-122 Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for Industrial Developments International.
1998 Rainforest Ranch Cultural Resource Survey and Significance Test for Prehistoric Sites CA-SDI-
14932, CA-SDI-14937, CA-SDI-14938, and CA-SDI-14946 County of San Diego, California.
Prepared for the Boys and Girls Club of Inland North County.
1998 Cultural Resource Evaluation Report for the Oceanside-Escondido Bikeway Project San Marcos,
California.
1998 Final Report: Cultural Resource Survey Report for the Sterling Property, Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for SPT Holdings LCC.
1996 Final Report: Archaeological Survey and Test for the Huber Property Carlsbad, California.
Prepared for Gene Huber.
1996 Final Report: Results of Phase II Test Excavations and Phase III Data Recovery Excavations at
Nine Archaeological Sites Within the Newport Coast Planned Community Phase III Entitlement
Area, San Joaquin Hills, Orange County, California. Prepared for Coastal Community Builders, a
division of The Irvine Company.
BFSA Environmental Services, a Perennial Company, 17
1995 Preliminary Report: Phase II Test Results From Nine Prehistoric Archaeological Sites within the
Proposed Upper Newport Bay Regional County Park. Prepared for EDAW, Inc.
1995 Final Report: A Phase II Test Excavation at CA-ORA-136, Block 800 City of Newport Beach,
Orange County California. Prepared for the Irvine Apartment Communities.
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX B
Archaeological Records Search Results
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)
Cultural Resources Study for the RC Homes – Citrus Avenue Project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX C
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results
(Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)