Bridge Street Bridge Project Archaeological Survey Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT January 2016 PREPARED FOR California Department of Transportation District 5 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-5415 City of Arroyo Grande 300 E. Branch St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 PREPARED BY SWCA Environmental Consultants 1422 Monterey Street, Suite C200 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Bridge Street Bridge Project Archaeological Survey Report SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Proposed Undertaking: The City of Arroyo Grande (City) proposes to replace or rehabilitate existing Bridge 49C-0196 at Bridge Street. Bridge Street follows a north-south corridor approximately 0.2 miles east of U.S. Highway 101 in the city of Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. The bridge provides vehicular access over Arroyo Grande Creek, which runs through the city approximately parallel to State Route 227. Purpose and Scope of the Survey: Quincy Engineering, Inc. retained SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) to prepare California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) cultural resources documentation in support of the proposed Bridge Street Bridge Project (project). The intent of this Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) is to achieve Section 106 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance for the project as it relates to archaeological resources. This ASR was prepared in accordance with Caltrans’s most recent edition of Standard Environmental Reference, Volume 2, Cultural Resources (2014a). Investigation Constraints: Approximately 30 percent of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) is paved or landscaped, and approximately 30 percent is heavily vegetated, which precluded a comprehensive surface examination. The remaining portion of the APE, primarily within the designated picnic area and within some areas of the creek banks adjacent to the creek bottom had good to excellent visibility (75-90 percent) at the time of the survey. Number and Types of Identified Archaeological Resources: The intensive pedestrian survey identified no previously unrecorded historic or prehistoric archaeological resources within the archaeological APE. A very sparse scatter consisting of six Pismo clam (Tivela stultorum), five highly fragmented bottle glass pieces (from the same vessel), and a glass perfume stopper was observed 5 meters north of the single picnic bench in the northeastern portion of the APE. The scatter was observed on a slope, which appears to have been modified during the development of the park/picnic area. No burned soils or metal fragments were observed. Given the extremely low density of the scatter and the disturbed context, the shell scatter does not constitute an archaeological resource. In consultation with the Principal Investigator and District 5 Archaeologist, Kelda Wilson (Personal Communication to Leroy Laurie 2013), the shell and glass scatter was not formally recorded and it is considered exempt from evaluation as described in Attachment 4 of the First Amended Programmatic Agreement among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in California (Caltrans 2014b). Conclusions: No archaeological resources were identified within the APE. The results of the literature search, Native American coordination, and pedestrian survey indicate that the archaeological APE has low sensitivity for the presence of archaeological resources. Policy Statement: It is Caltrans’s policy to avoid cultural resources whenever possible. If buried cultural materials are encountered during construction, it is Caltrans’s policy that work stop in that area until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the find. Additional survey will be required if the project changes to include areas not previously surveyed. Disposition of Data: This report will be filed with Caltrans District 5, County of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works, Quincy Engineering, Inc., Central Coastal Information Center at University of California, Santa Barbara, and the SWCA San Luis Obispo, California, office. All field notes, photographs, and records related to the current study are on file at the SWCA San Luis Obispo office. SWCA Environmental Consultants i Bridge Street Bridge Project Archaeological Survey Report This page intentionally left blank. SWCA Environmental Consultants ii Bridge Street Bridge Project Archaeological Survey Report CONTENTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... I INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................... 4 PROJECT SETTING ............................................................................................................................. 4 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF PROJECT ............................................................................................... 4 Replacement Alternative .................................................................................................................. 4 Rehabilitation Alternative ................................................................................................................ 4 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS ...................................................................................................... 5 SOURCES CONSULTED .......................................................................................................................... 5 SUMMARY OF METHODS AND RESULTS ..................................................................................... 5 Previous Studies ............................................................................................................................... 6 Previously Recorded Sites within 0.5 Mile of the Archaeological APE .......................................... 6 SUMMARY OF NATIVE AMERICAN COORDINATION ................................................................ 6 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 9 ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................................... 9 Geoarchaeological Setting and Sensitivity ...................................................................................... 9 ETHNOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................ 10 PREHISTORY ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Paleoindian Period/Paleo-Coastal Tradition (ca. 10,000–6500 B.C.) ............................................ 11 Milling Stone Period (ca. 6500–3500 B.C.)................................................................................... 12 Early Period and Early-Middle Transition Period (3500–600 B.C.) ............................................. 12 Middle Period (600 B.C.–A.D. 1000) ............................................................................................ 13 Middle-Late Transition Period (A.D. 1000–1250) ........................................................................ 13 Late Period (A.D. 1250–Historic Contact) .................................................................................... 13 HISTORIC OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 14 Project Area Specific Review ........................................................................................................ 15 FIELD METHODS ................................................................................................................................... 15 STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 15 FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................................................. 15 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................. 16 Unidentified Cultural Materials ..................................................................................................... 16 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ................................................................................ 16 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................ 17 SWCA Environmental Consultants iii Bridge Street Bridge Project Archaeological Survey Report Figures Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Project Area Map ........................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Area of Potential Effects Map ......................................................................................................