APPENDIX D Cultural Resources Report

San Gabriel Plaza Project (220 South San Gabriel Boulevard)

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report

prepared for Michael Baker International 5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500 Santa Ana, California 92707 Contact: Alicia E. Gonzalez

prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 301 Los Angeles, California 90012

March 2018

Please cite this report as follows: Dodds, Tricia 2018 Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report for the San Gabriel Plaza Project, 220 South San Gabriel Boulevard, San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California. Rincon Consultants Project No. 17-04141. Report on file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... 1 1 Introduction ...... 3 1.1 Project Location and Description ...... 3 1.2 Project Description ...... 3 2 Regulatory Setting ...... 6 2.1 California Environmental Quality Act...... 6 2.1.1 Assembly Bill 52 ...... 6 2.2 City of San Gabriel Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Ordinance ...... 7 2.2.1 Designation Criteria for Historic Landmarks ...... 7 2.2.2 Archaeological and Native American Cultural Resources ...... 8 3 Background ...... 9 3.1 Prehistoric Overview ...... 9 3.1.1 Early Man Horizon (ca. 10,000 – 6,000 B.C.) ...... 9 3.1.2 Milling Stone Horizon (6,000 – 3,000 B.C.) ...... 9 3.1.3 Intermediate Horizon (3,000 B.C. – A.D. 500)...... 10 3.1.4 Late Prehistoric Horizon (A.D. 500 – Historic Contact) ...... 10 3.2 Ethnographic Overview ...... 11 3.3 Historic Overview ...... 12 3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769 – 1821) ...... 12 3.3.2 Mexican Period (1821 – 1848) ...... 13 3.3.3 American Period (1848 – Present) ...... 14 4 Records Search and Outreach ...... 17 4.1 Cultural Resources Records Search ...... 17 4.2 Native American Outreach ...... 21 5 Field Survey ...... 22 6 Findings and Recommendations ...... 24 6.1 Workers Environmental Awareness Program ...... 24 6.2 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring ...... 25 6.3 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources ...... 25 6.4 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains ...... 25 7 References...... 26

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report i Michael Baker International San Gabriel Plaza Project (220 South San Gabriel Boulevard)

Tables Table 1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Within ½ Mile of the Project Site ...... 17 Table 2 Previously Conducted Cultural Resources Studies Within ½ Mile of the Project Site. .... 20

Figures Figure 1 Regional and Vicinity Maps...... 4 Figure 2 Project Site ...... 5 Figure 3 220_224 South San Gabriel ...... 22 Figure 4 Project Site Location ...... 23 Figure 5 Project Site ...... 23

Attachments Attachment A Cultural Resources Records Search Results [Confidential] Attachment B AB 52 Native American Consultations Documentation

ii Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Purpose and Scope Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) was retained by Michael Baker International on behalf of the City of San Gabriel (City) to prepare the required technical studies for an Initial Study in support of the San Gabriel Plaza Project at 220 South San Gabriel Boulevard (project) San Gabriel. This Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report included a cultural resources records search, review of archival materials, and preparation of the Cultural Resources Inventory Report. For an inventory and evaluation of historical built resources within the project site, see the Historical Resources Evaluation Report for the San Gabriel Plaza Project prepared by Rincon as part of the cultural study efforts. This project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of San Gabriel’s Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Ordinance (HPCRO) codified in Chapter 153 of the San Gabriel Municipal Code. Dates of Investigation and Personnel On February 26, 2018, Rincon performed a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. Rincon Architectural Historian Rachel Perzel conducted a survey of the project site and surrounding area on March 15, 2018. A record search through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) consisting of available Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, historic aerial images and City Directory information was conducted on March 15, 2018. Available permits for the properties within the project site were requested from the City of San Gabriel on March 14, 2018. Rincon Archaeologist Tricia Dodds authored the following Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report in March 2018. Rincon Archaeological Program Manager Benjamin Vargas provided peer review and quality assurance. Rincon Principal Joe Power, AICP CEP, reviewed this report for quality control. Summary of Findings and Recommendations A cultural resources records search was conducted for the project area and no prehistoric or historical resources were identified on the project site. However, the project site and general vicinity is considered to be sensitive for prehistoric and historic cultural resources due to the area’s association with Mission San Gabriel Arcángel and several known Native American villages previously located nearby. Rincon therefore recommends a finding of less than significant impact to historical resources with mitigation incorporated for the purposes of CEQA, and presents the following measures to ensure that impacts to cultural resources are reduced or eliminated. This finding is concurrent with the requirements for managing cultural resources outlined in the City of San Gabriel’s HPCRO.

Workers Environmental Awareness Program A Workers Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training shall be prepared to address cultural resources issues anticipated at the project site. The WEAP should include information of the laws and regulations that protect cultural resources, the penalties for a disregard of those laws and

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 1

regulations, what to do if cultural resources are unexpectedly uncovered during construction, and contact information for a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), who shall be contacted in the case of unanticipated discoveries. The WEAP should include project specific information regarding the potential for and types of prehistoric and historic resources that may potentially be encountered.

Archaeological and Native American Monitoring A qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), should be retained to perform all mitigation measures related to prehistoric and historic cultural resources for the project. An archaeologist and Native American monitor should be present to monitor all initial ground disturbing activities associated with the project, including but not limited to: removal of building foundations and asphalt, grading of soils, trenching for utilities, and excavations associated with development. If, during initial ground disturbance, the monitors determine that the ground disturbing activities have little or no potential to impact cultural resources, and/or the monitors determine that ground disturbances would occur within previously disturbed and non-native soils, the qualified archaeologist may recommend that monitoring may be reduced or eliminated. This decision will be made in consultation with the Native American monitor and the City of San Gabriel. The final decision to reduce or eliminate monitoring will be at the discretion of the City of San Gabriel. If cultural resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work within the immediate area must halt and the find must be evaluated for local and/or state significance.

Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources If cultural resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), should be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data recovery excavation and Native American consultation may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts.

Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Introduction

1 Introduction

1.1 Project Location and Description

The project site is located at 220 South San Gabriel Boulevard in the City of San Gabriel (Figure 1). The project site encompasses an approximately 3.59-acre area on the east side of South San Gabriel Boulevard near the intersection of East Live Oak Avenue (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APN] 5373- 001-001 through -005, 5373-001-007, 5373-001-008, 5373-001-013, 5373-001-014, and 5373-002- 026), (Figure 2). The site is bounded by an assortment of commercial uses to the north and south, San Gabriel Boulevard, commercial, and vacant uses to the west, and residential uses to the east. The Rubio Wash is outside of the project site boundary and trends along the southwestern edge in a northwest to southeast fashion. The project site is relatively flat and is currently developed with several one- story commercial buildings, single-family and multi-family residences, surface parking lots, and vacant disturbed land. Existing on-site commercial and residential buildings total approximately 25,649 square feet. In addition, the southeastern portion of the project site includes temporary buildings associated with a bus parking business. 1.2 Project Description

The proposed mixed-use development involves the construction of approximately 28,665 square feet of commercial space and 149 condominium units at two phases. All existing buildings on the project site would be demolished. The proposed development would include a combination of five and six-story buildings as well as two levels of underground parking (up to 585 spaces). The project applicant may dedicate a public park located in the southwestern portion of the project site near the Rubio Wash (APN 5373-001-023) to the City of San Gabriel. The project is expected to be completed in two construction phases: . Phase I is located at the northern end of the project site between South San Gabriel Boulevard and the east property line. It includes the construction of all commercial areas, 92 residential condominiums, and the residential clubhouse in three buildings. All buildings are above two levels of underground parking with 484 spaces. . Phase II is located at the southeastern end of the project site. It includes the construction of 57 condominiums in a single-story building over two levels of underground parking with 86 spaces.

A third Phase (Phase III) may be incorporated into the project to include an additional parcel along the northerly edge of the project site (APN 5373-01-008). This potential phase includes the demolition of the current on-site residential building to incorporate the parcel into a building in Phase I with 14 additional condominiums and one level of parking with 15 spaces.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 3

Figure 1 Regional and Vicinity Maps

Introduction

Figure 2 Project Site

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 5

2 Regulatory Setting

2.1 California Environmental Quality Act

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, in this case the City of San Gabriel, to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on historical resources (Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21084.1). A historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), a resource included in a local register of historical resources, or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5[a] [1-3]). A resource shall be considered historically significant if it: 1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; 2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or 4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

In addition, if a project would cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required. PRC, Section 21083.2[a], [b], and PRC, Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, the probability is high that it: 1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or 3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

2.1.1 Assembly Bill 52 As of July 1, 2015, California AB 52 of 2014 (AB 52) was enacted and expands CEQA by defining a new resource category, tribal cultural resources. AB 52 establishes that “a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.2). It further states that the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3). PRC Section 21074

Regulatory Setting

(a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and is either: . Listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k); or . A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources. The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. AB 52 requires that lead agencies “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed in the jurisdiction of the lead agency. 2.2 City of San Gabriel Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Ordinance

The City of San Gabriel (City) has a long tradition of recognizing cultural resources and codifying regulations for their identification, documentation, and management. In 1965, the City adopted one of the earliest historic preservation ordinances in Los Angeles County. In 1994, the City passed a resolution recognizing the Gabrielino-Tongva Nation as “the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles Basin” (City of San Gabriel 2004:CR-5). In May 2004, the City adopted updates to its General Plan, including Chapter 11: Cultural Resources: A Heritage Worth Preserving. Chapter 11 of the General Plan provides an overview of the City’s priorities and objectives for cultural resources, and addresses both built environment resources and cultural resources relating to the Native American community. In August 2017, the San Gabriel City Council adopted an updated Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Ordinance (HPCRO). Codified in Chapter 153 of the San Gabriel Municipal Code, the HPCRO established the San Gabriel Register of Cultural Resources as well as new eligibility criteria for local-level designation of cultural resources. Given the importance of cultural resources in the City, the HPCRO also codifies standards and requirements for the identification, documentation, and management of cultural resources, as well as requires the review and approval of studies relating to cultural resources within the City.

2.2.1 Designation Criteria for Historic Landmarks Section 153.607 of the HPCRO refers to cultural resources as historic landmarks, and outlines eligibility criteria for their listing on the San Gabriel Register of Cultural Resources. The HPCRO defines a historic landmark as a property, site, public art, park, cultural landscape, or natural feature which has maintained its integrity and meets one of the following eligibility criteria: 1) It is or was once associated or identified with important events or broad patters of development that have made a significant contribution to the cultural, architectural, social historical, economic, and political heritage of the city, region, state, or nation;

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 7

2) It is or was once associated with an important person or persons who made a significant contribution to the history, development, and/or cultural of the city, region, state, or nation; 3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic or aesthetic values, or it represents one of the last and best remaining examples of an architectural type of style in a neighborhood or the city that was once common but is increasingly rare; or 4) It has yielded or has the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the city, region, state, or nation (City of San Gabriel 2017:15).

2.2.2 Archaeological and Native American Cultural Resources The City has also developed procedures for the identification, documentation and management of archaeological and Native American cultural resources on properties proposed for development and/or demolition which are: 1) Listed on the San Gabriel Register of Cultural Resources; 2) Listed on the CRHR or NRHP; 3) Determined by the Director of the Community Development Department or his/her designee or the State Historic Preservation Officer to be eligible for listing on the CRHR, the NRHP, or the San Gabriel Register of Cultural Resources; or 4) Located in areas with high or medium potential for the presence of Cultural Resources, as determined by the City’s Cultural Resource Sensitivity Map (City of San Gabriel 2017:39).

As mandated by the City, applicants for all projects that meet any of the above criteria are required to submit a Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report addressing potential cultural resources issues for the project.

Background

3 Background

3.1 Prehistoric Overview

During the twentieth century, many archaeologists developed chronological sequences to explain prehistoric cultural changes within all or portions of southern California (c.f., Moratto 1984; Jones and Klar 2007). Wallace (1955, 1978) devised a prehistoric chronology for the southern California coastal region based on early studies and focused on data synthesis that included four horizons: Early Man, Milling Stone, Intermediate, and Late Prehistoric. Though initially lacking the chronological precision of absolute dates (Moratto 1984), Wallace’s (1955) synthesis has been modified and improved using thousands of radiocarbon dates obtained by southern California researchers over recent decades (Koerper and Drover 1983; Mason and Peterson 1994; Koerper et al. 2002; Byrd and Raab 2007). The prehistoric chronological sequence for southern California presented below is a composite based on Wallace (1955) and Warren (1968) as well as later studies, including Koerper and Drover (1983).

3.1.1 Early Man Horizon (ca. 10,000 – 6,000 B.C.) Numerous pre-8,000 B.C. sites have been identified along the mainland coast and Channel Islands of southern California (c.f., Moratto 1984; Erlandson 1991; Rick et al. 2001; Johnson et al. 2002; Jones and Klar 2007). The Arlington Springs site on Santa Rosa Island produced human femurs dated to approximately 13,000 years ago (Johnson et al. 2002; Arnold et al. 2004). On nearby San Miguel Island, human occupation at Daisy Cave (CA-SMI-261) has been dated to nearly 13,000 years ago and included basketry greater than 12,000 years old, the earliest recorded on the Pacific Coast (Arnold et al. 2004). Although few Clovis or Folsom style fluted points have been found in southern California (e.g., Erlandson et al. 1987; Dillon 2002), Early Man Horizon sites are generally associated with a greater emphasis on hunting than later horizons. Recent data indicate that the Early Man economy was a diverse mixture of hunting and gathering, including a significant focus on aquatic resources in coastal areas (e.g., Jones et al. 2002) and on inland Pleistocene lakeshores (Moratto 1984). A warm and dry 3,000-year period called the Altithermal began around 6,000 B.C. The conditions of the Altithermal are likely responsible for the change in human subsistence patterns at this time, including a greater emphasis on plant foods and small game.

3.1.2 Milling Stone Horizon (6,000 – 3,000 B.C.) Wallace (1955:219) defined the Milling Stone Horizon as “marked by extensive use of milling stones and mullers, a general lack of well-made projectile points, and burials with rock cairns.” The dominance of such artifact types indicate a subsistence strategy oriented around collecting plant foods and small animals. A broad spectrum of food resources were consumed including small and large terrestrial mammals, sea mammals, birds, shellfish and other littoral and estuarine species, near-shore fishes, yucca, agave, and seeds and other plant products (Kowta 1969; Reinman 1964). Variability in artifact collections over time and from the coast to inland sites indicates that Milling Stone Horizon subsistence strategies adapted to environmental conditions (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 9

Lithic artifacts associated with Milling Stone Horizon sites are dominated by locally available tool stone and in addition to ground stone tools such as manos and metates, chopping, scraping, and cutting tools are very common. Kowta (1969) attributes the presence of numerous scraper-plane tools in Milling Stone Horizon collections to the processing of agave or yucca for food or fiber. The mortar and pestle, associated with acorns or other foods processed through pounding, were first used during the Milling Stone Horizon and increased dramatically in later periods (Wallace 1955, 1978; Warren 1968). Two types of artifacts that are considered diagnostic of the Milling Stone period are the cogged stone and discoidal, most of which have been found within sites dating between 4,000 and 1,000 B.C. (Moratto 1984), though possibly as far back as 5,500 B.C. (Couch et al. 2009). The cogged stone is a ground stone object that has gear-like teeth on the perimeter and is produced from a variety of materials. The function of cogged stones is unknown, but many scholars have postulated ritualistic or ceremonial uses (c.f., Eberhart 1961; Dixon 1968). Similar to cogged stones, discoidals are found in the archaeological record subsequent to the introduction of the cogged stone. Cogged stones and discoidals were often purposefully buried, or “cached.” Cogged stones have been collected in Los Angeles County though their distribution appears to center on the Santa Ana River basin (Eberhart 1961).

3.1.3 Intermediate Horizon (3,000 B.C. – A.D. 500) Wallace’s Intermediate Horizon dates from approximately 3,000 B.C. – A.D. 500 and is characterized by a shift toward a hunting and maritime subsistence strategy, as well as greater use of plant foods. During the Intermediate Horizon, a noticeable trend occurred towards a greater adaptation to local resources including a broad variety of fish, land mammals, and sea mammals along the coast. Tool kits for hunting, fishing, and processing food and materials reflect this increased diversity, with flake scrapers, drills, various projectile points, and shell fishhooks being manufactured. Mortars and pestles became more common during this transitional period, gradually replacing manos and metates as the dominant milling equipment. Many archaeologists believe this change in milling stone technology signals a transition from the processing and consumption of hard seed resources to the increased reliance on acorns (e.g., Glassow et al. 1988; True 1993). Mortuary practices during the Intermediate typically included fully flexed burials oriented toward the north or west (Warren 1968).

3.1.4 Late Prehistoric Horizon (A.D. 500 – Historic Contact) During Wallace’s (1955, 1978) Late Prehistoric Horizon, the diversity of plant food resources and land and sea mammal hunting increased even further than during the Intermediate Horizon. More classes of artifacts were observed during this period and high quality exotic lithic materials were used for small, finely worked projectile points associated with the bow and arrow. Steatite containers were made for cooking and storage and an increased use of asphalt for waterproofing is noted. More artistic artifacts were recovered from Late Prehistoric sites and cremation became a common mortuary custom. Larger, more permanent villages supported an increased population size and social structure (Wallace 1955). Warren (1968) attributes this change in material culture, burial practices, and subsistence focus to the westward migration of desert people he called the Takic, or Numic, Tradition in Los Angeles, Orange, and western Riverside counties. This Takic Tradition was formerly referred to as the “Shoshonean wedge” (Warren 1968); however, this nomenclature is no longer used to avoid confusion with ethnohistoric and modern Shoshonean groups (Shipley 1978).

Background

3.2 Ethnographic Overview

The project site is located in the traditional territory of the Native American group known as the Gabrieliño, Tongva or Kizh (Bean and Smith 1978:538; Johnston 1962; Kroeber 1925:Plate 57; McCawley 1996). What the Native Americans who inhabited southern California called themselves has long been a topic of discussion among scholars and living descendants of these people (Johnston 1962; McCawley 1996; Reid 1978). While the name Gabrieliño was applied by the Spanish to those natives that were associated with the Mission San Gabriel Arcángel (Bean and Smith 1978), that name does not necessarily correlate to how the inhabitants of the region referred to themselves. Today, most contemporary Gabrieliño prefer to identify themselves as Tongva (King 1994), though some use the name Kizh. Generally, the names Tongva and Kizh are derivatives of placenames or village names in and around Mission San Gabriel, or referents to inhabitants of those villages. The village of “tōƞwe” was purported to be near Mission San Gabriel, and its inhabitants may have been referred to as Tobikhar (McCawley 1996:9). The name Kizh, Kij, or Kichereño was associated with people living near the original location of Mission San Gabriel, approximately 3 miles southeast of its present location (California Missions Resources Center n.d.). The word Kizh is likely a derivative of a word meaning “house.” The name Tongva is used throughout the remainder of this report as it is currently most commonly used by present day descendants (McCawley 1996). Tongva territory included the Los Angeles basin and southern Channel Islands as well as the coast from Aliso Creek in the south to Topanga Creek in the north. Their territory encompassed several biotic zones, including coastal marsh, coastal strand, prairie, chaparral, oak woodland, and pine forest (Bean and Smith 1978; McCawley 1996). The watersheds of the Rio Hondo, the Los Angeles, and the Santa Ana rivers as well as many tributaries and creeks such as Ballona Creek, Tujunga Wash, Arroyo Seco, and others were within the territory of the Tongva. The Tongva territory was bordered by several different Native American groups including the Serrano to the north and northeast, the Tataviam to the north, the Chumash to the northwest, the Cahuilla to the east, and the Luiseño and Juaneño to the south and southeast. The Tongva language belongs to the Takic branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family, which can be traced to the Great Basin region (Mithun 1999). This language family includes dialects spoken by the nearby Juaneño and Luiseño, but is considerably different from those of the Chumash people living to the north and the Diegueño (including Ipai, Tipai, and Kumeyaay) people living to the south. Tongva society was organized along patrilineal non-localized clans, a common Takic pattern. Each clan had a ceremonial leader and contained several lineages. The Tongva established permanent villages and smaller satellite camps throughout their territory. Recent ethnohistoric work (O’Neil 2002) suggests a total tribal population of nearly 10,000, considerably more than earlier estimates of around 5,000 people (Bean and Smith 1978:540). Tongva subsistence was oriented around acorns supplemented by the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruits of a wide variety of plants and animals. Meat sources included large and small mammals, freshwater and saltwater fish, shellfish, birds, reptiles, and insects (Kroeber 1976; Bean and Smith 1978; McCawley 1996; Langenwalter et al. 2001). The Tongva employed a wide variety of tools and implements to gather and hunt food. The digging stick, used to extract roots and tubers, was frequently noted by early European explorers (Rawls 1984). Other tools included the bow and arrow, traps, nets, blinds, throwing sticks and slings, spears, harpoons, and hooks. Like the Chumash, the Tongva made oceangoing plank canoes (known as a ti’at) capable of holding six to 14 people used for fishing, travel, and trade between the mainland and the Channel Islands. Tule reed canoes were employed for near-shore fishing (Blackburn 1963; McCawley 1996).

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 11

The Tongva lived in circular domed structures made up of thatched tule covering a frame of wooden poles usually of willow. Size estimates vary for these houses, and very few have been identified in archaeological contexts; however, some are said to have been able to house up to 50 people (Bean and Smith 1978). In cases where houses have been identified and recovered archaeologically, extramural features such as hearths and storage pits have been identified (Vargas et al. 2016). Chinigchinich, the last in a series of heroic mythological figures, was central to Tongva religious life at the time of Spanish contact (Kroeber 1976). The belief in Chinigchinich was spreading south among other Takic-speaking groups at the same time the Spanish were establishing Christian missions. Elements of Chinigchinich beliefs suggest it was a syncretic mixture of Christianity and native religious practices (McCawley 1996). Prior to European contact, deceased Tongva were either buried or cremated, with burial more common on the Channel Islands and the adjacent mainland coast and cremation on the remainder of the coast and in the interior (Harrington 1942; McCawley 1996). However, after pressure from Spanish missionaries, cremation essentially ceased during the post-contact period (McCawley 1996). Several different Tongva village or community locations have been identified in the San Gabriel Valley. The names Shevaanga, Sonaanga, Sheshiikwanonga, Akuuronga, Aluupkenga, Ashuukshanga, Weniinga, and Ahwiinga have all been identified as communities along the watershed feeding the Rio Hondo River out of the San Gabriel Mountains (McCawley 1996:42). The village of Shevaanga was said to be located at the present site of the Mission San Gabriel. In the more immediate vicinity of the project area, the villages of Shevaanga, Sonaanga, Sheshiikwanonga, and Akuuronga have been identified as relatively close-knit communities, likely with political and economic ties to one another (McCawley 1996:41). These communities were said to have shared a common dialect that Mission priests referred to as Simbanga (Kroeber 1925; McCawley 1996). According to maps of Tongva sites in the region, a village may have once been present in the direct vicinity of the current project site (Los Angeles County 1938; Flaherty 2016). 3.3 Historic Overview

The post-contact history of California is generally divided into three time spans: the Spanish period (1769 – 1821), the Mexican period (1821 – 1848), and the American period (1848 – present). Each of these periods is briefly described below.

3.3.1 Spanish Period (1769 – 1821) Spanish exploration of California began when Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo led the first European expedition into the region in 1542. For more than 200 years after his initial expedition, Spanish, Portuguese, British, and Russian explorers sailed the California coast and made limited inland expeditions, but they did not establish permanent settlements (Bean 1968; Rolle 2003). In 1769, Gaspar de Portolá and Franciscan Father Junipero Serra established the first Spanish settlement in what was then known as Alta (upper) California at Mission San Diego de Alcalá. This was the first of 21 missions erected by the Spanish between 1769 and 1823. It was during this time that initial Spanish settlement of the project vicinity began. On September 8, 1771, Mission San Gabriel Arcángel (Mission San Gabriel) was established in present-day Montebello, approximately 3 miles southeast of its present location (California Missions Resources Center N.d.). Due to frequent flooding, the mission was relocated in 1775 to its current site near the San Gabriel River. Mission San Gabriel was the fourth of 21 missions established

Background between 1769 and 1823 in Alta California, and the first permanent Euro-American settlement in Los Angeles County. Mission San Gabriel quickly became one of the wealthiest and most expansive missions in Alta California. Surrounding the mission were vast agricultural lands, vineyards, gardens, and livestock. One early technological advancement came in 1816 when the mission’s first mill was constructed in nearby San Marino. Referred to as El Molino Viejo (the Old Mill), the mill was the first of its kind in the area, but, due to a flawed design, it was replaced in 1821 by a mill on the grounds of the mission; a portion of the original mill was recently discovered, partially recovered, and restored on the mission grounds. Designed by Joseph Chapman in the model of American textile mills, and built with Native American labor, Chapman’s mill represented a great innovation. During this period, Spain also granted ranchos to prominent citizens and soldiers in the area. To manage and expand their herds of cattle on these large ranchos, colonists enlisted the labor of the surrounding Native American population (Engelhardt 1927). The missions were responsible for administrating to the local Indians as well as converting the population to Christianity (Engelhardt 1927). The influx of European settlers brought the local Native American population in contact with European diseases which they had no immunity against, resulting in a catastrophic reduction in native populations throughout the state (McCawley 1996). One important aspect of San Gabriel’s long history in the region stretches back to this era. In 1781, a procession of soldiers, laypeople, and priests led by Spanish Governor Felipe de Neve left Mission San Gabriel to select a new townsite for Los Angeles. Governor Neve and representatives from the mission sought to establish Los Angeles in order to supplement the agricultural goods produced at the mission (Fogelson 1967). Los Angeles’s site shifted twice due to flooding from the nearby river, and eventually settled at the present-day Los Angeles Plaza Historic District.

3.3.2 Mexican Period (1821 – 1848) The Mexican Period commenced when news of the success of the Mexican War of Independence (1810 – 1821) against the Spanish crown reached California in 1822. This period saw the privatization of mission lands in California with the passage of the Secularization Act of 1833. This act federalized mission lands and enabled Mexican governors in California to distribute former mission lands to individuals in the form of land grants. Successive Mexican governors made approximately 700 land grants between 1833 and 1846, putting most of the state’s lands into private ownership for the first time (Shumway 2007). During this era, a class of wealthy landowners known as rancheros worked large ranches based on cattle hide and tallow production. The beginnings of a profitable trade in cattle hide and tallow exports opened the way for larger, commercially driven farms. Land grants owned by the Spanish crown and clergy were distributed to mostly Mexican settlers born in California, or the “Californios.” While this shift marked the beginning of the rancho system that would “dominate California life for nearly half a century” (Poole 2002:13), the rural character of emerging cities in and around San Gabriel and Los Angeles remained intact. Ranchos were largely self-sufficient enterprises (partly out of necessity, given California’s geographic isolation), producing goods to maintain their households and operations. By 1830, the holdings of Mission San Gabriel had come to include a lumbermill, leather and carpentry shops, a tile kiln, and wide ranging facilities for the processing and production of soap, leather, hides, and other goods (Williams 2005:19). As for livestock, the mission boasted over 100,000 head of oxen, 20,000 horses, 40,000 sheep, 31,000 bushels of grain, and 500 barrels of wine and brandy (Sugranes 1909:5-7). In 1834, the vast land holdings of the mission were

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 13

transferred to a civil administrator and in the subsequent decade, many artifacts and items of value were removed and the mission fell into disrepair. In the 1840s, Governor Pío de Jesus Pico (who himself was born at Mission San Gabriel as the son of a mission guard) began selling off California’s missions in order to fund local defense forces to support the Mexican-American War (Arnold 2013). In 1846, the Mexican government sold Mission San Gabriel and its 16,000 acres of land to early settlers and entrepreneurs William Workman and Don Hugo Reid in order to repay war debts due to the war (Engelhardt 1927:216-229). Mexican forces fought and lost to combined U.S. Army and Navy forces in the Battle of the San Gabriel River on January 8 and in the Battle of La Mesa on January 9 (Nevin 1978). On January 10, leaders of the pueblo of Los Angeles surrendered peacefully after Mexican General Jose Maria Flores withdrew his forces. Shortly thereafter, newly appointed Mexican Military Commander of California Andrés Pico surrendered all of Alta California to U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel John C. Fremont in the Treaty of Cahuenga (Nevin 1978).

3.3.3 American Period (1848 – Present) The Mexican Period officially ended in early January 1848 with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, formally concluding the Mexican-American War. Per the treaty, the United States agreed to pay Mexico $15 million for conquered territory, including California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. California gained statehood in 1850, and this political shift set in motion a variety of factors that began to erode the rancho system. Given the size of their holdings, the initiation of property taxes proved onerous for many southern California ranchers. In addition, the creation of the U.S. Land Commission in 1851 required that property owners prove the validity of their property titles, many of which had been granted relatively informally and without the benefit of formal survey. Ranchers often paid for legal debts with portions—or all—of their ranchos. During this period, 40 percent of rancho-held lands in the County of Los Angeles passed to the U.S. government. The large-scale rancho system also suffered greatly from the 1860s droughts, which decimated the cattle industry upon which southern Californian ranchers depended. In 1848, the discovery of gold in northern California led to the California Gold Rush, though the first gold was found in 1842 by settlers in Placerita Canyon, approximately 40 miles to the northwest of San Gabriel (Workman 1935; Guinn 1977). The Gold Rush significantly transformed northern California and also contributed to an exponential increase in California’s population overall. During this time, San Francisco became California’s first true city, growing from a population of 812 to 25,000 in only a few years (Rolle 2003). By 1853, the population of California exceeded 300,000. Thousands of settlers and immigrants continued to immigrate to the state, particularly after the completion of the First Transcontinental Railroad in 1869. During the Gold Rush, San Gabriel became one of the first townships established in Los Angeles County. By 1860, the population as recorded by the US Census was just over 580 residents (Arnold 2013:31). The San Gabriel Valley was seen as a particularly inviting place for new settlement, due to its fertile soil, abundant land, and ample water supply. In this era, newly founded farmsteads were established, offering citrus and nut orchards, grain, and vineyards. Describing the offerings of the San Gabriel Valley, local pioneer Benjamin Wilson noted that “every species of grain and fruit is in great abundance” in the valley (City of San Gabriel 1966). The history of the emerging town continued to be closely tied to that of Mission San Gabriel. Following California’s entry into the United States and the subsequent legal review of real estate

Background transactions, the Catholic diocese regained ownership of the mission in 1853. Although decades of neglect had taken its toll on the mission, the church was returned to service as a parish between 1862 and 1908. In 1908, rebuilding efforts of Mission San Gabriel began, following the arrival of the Claretian Fathers who are credited with restoring the mission. One of San Gabriel’s pioneering residents in the early American period was David Franklin Hall, who arrived in 1854. Hall purchased a mission adobe residence on Mission Drive from Hipolito Cervantes and opened one of the town’s first grocery stores. Between 1861 and 1874, Hall served as postmaster of San Gabriel. In the 1870s, Hall adapted his adobe residence as a hotel for visitors to San Gabriel. The San Gabriel Hotel continued to operate as the town’s only hotel for a decade. Following Hall’s ownership, the inn remained in use as a hotel, though under different names, such as the Bailey Hotel, Grapevine Inn, and eventually as Café de Espanola in the 1930s. In the 1880s, a real estate boom arrived in southern California, fueled by a speculative real estate market and increasingly accessible rail travel (Deverell 1994). New southern Californian towns were promoted as havens for good health and economic opportunity. In 1883, the California Immigration Commission designed an advertisement declaring the state as “the Cornucopia of the World” (Poole 2002:36). Between 1880 and 1890, the population of Los Angeles expanded fivefold, from approximately 11,000 to 50,000; this figure peaked in 1888 at approximately 80,000 (Los Angeles Times 1891). Following the collapse of the real estate market in 1888, economic stagnancy lasted through the mid-1890s in the region. Despite the economic downturn, the industrial and commercial transformation of the region was well entrenched. San Gabriel felt the effects of the 1880s real estate boom (and bust). The arrival of the Southern Pacific Railway Line, which intersected San Gabriel just north of the project site, catalyzed settlement, economic and agricultural expansion, and tourism in San Gabriel. Even in this early period, San Gabriel stood out from other new boom towns for its authentic, old world flavor. Given the proximity to the railway lines, agricultural goods, in particular citrus crops, thrived in San Gabriel and neighboring communities. In addition to goods, early businesspeople and real estate speculators in and around San Gabriel were anxious to capitalize on the influx of visitors and settlers and the abundance of open land. During the building boom of the 1880s, the East San Gabriel Hotel, a 130-room resort was constructed. As the 1880s boom ended, however, the hotel was closed and repurposed as the Southern California Sanitarium, a retreat for the many health seekers drawn to the area by the southern California climate.

3.3.3.1 The City of San Gabriel As the twentieth century began, Mission San Gabriel remained the cultural and aesthetic touchstone for San Gabriel’s emerging identity and urban form. By the time the City of San Gabriel was officially established following its incorporation in 1913, the mission was already nearly 140 years old. San Gabriel recognized and embraced its unique heritage and culture through the Mission Revival and Spanish Colonial Revival style buildings constructed throughout the City, as well as through its recognition of its longstanding Native American heritage. In 1994, the City Council adopted a resolution formally recognizing the Gabrielino-Tongva Nation as “the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles Basin” (City of San Gabriel 2004:CR-5). By the turn of the twentieth century, while most neighboring cities were emerging, Mission San Gabriel was established and already a local tourist attraction. Even as San Gabriel recognized its past, it also embraced the future. When electricity arrived, Henry Huntington’s Pacific Electric Car, or “Red Cars” as they were known, ran along the historic corridor of Mission Drive and facilitated

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 15

regional travel and tourism. New shops, businesses, and merchants were established along Mission Drive and other areas. One such expanding area for commerce was East San Gabriel, the location of the project site. This area would eventually become known as the East San Gabriel business district with San Gabriel Boulevard at its center. The City of San Gabriel’s civic life and institutions began to take shape in earnest in the 1910s. In 1913, the City’s residents voted in favor of incorporation. By 1914, the City’s first team of officials had been appointed, and civic infrastructure and institutions quickly followed. San Gabriel’s first bank, located at 343 South Mission Drive, was constructed in 1914 near Mission San Gabriel. While the 1910s brought steady development and expansion, the 1920s witnessed a boom in population and building expansion. The boom of the 1920s in southern California brought an estimated 1.5 million new residents to the region (McWilliams 1946). The ascendancy of the automobile facilitated this influx and decisively shaped the character of emerging towns and cities. San Gabriel saw significant expansion in the 1920s. By 1925, the San Gabriel Valley was said to have a population of 100,000 residents, with just over 5,000 residing in the City of San Gabriel (Los Angeles Times 1925). As of the late 1920s, most development and settlement in San Gabriel was concentrated in neighborhoods near the original mission site and grounds. The boom of the 1920s ended with the onset of the Great Depression. Even so, San Gabriel saw a mini-construction boom in the late 1930s with the establishment of the Federal Housing Administration and its home ownership loan program. Transportation improvements also spurred development in San Gabriel in the late 1930s and 1940s. Construction of the Arroyo Seco Parkway (State Route 110) in 1938 provided a convenient connection between the growing metropolis of Los Angeles and the towns of Pasadena and neighboring communities such as San Gabriel. In addition, construction of the San Bernardino Freeway (Interstate 10) just south of San Gabriel provided an easily accessible link for communities within southern California as well as interstate travelers and tourists. San Gabriel continues to cater to visitors who come to experience its unique cultural heritage and history as the “Birthplace of the Los Angeles Region” (City of San Gabriel n.d.).

Records Search and Outreach

4 Records Search and Outreach

The following sections summarize the cultural resources records search and Native American consultation performed for the project. The results of the records search are included as Attachment A to this report. Please note: the cultural resources records search results are considered confidential and cannot be distributed to or circulated in public documents. See Attachment B for the Native American consultation. 4.1 Cultural Resources Records Search

On February 26, 2018, Rincon performed a search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located at California State University, Fullerton. The search was conducted to identify previously identified cultural resources that have been recorded on the project site, as well as previously conducted cultural resources studies that have included a portion of the project site and 0.5-mile radius surrounding it (records search area). The CHRIS search also included a review of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the CRHR, as well as available historic maps and aerial photographs (confidential Attachment A). The SCCIC records search identified 42 previously recorded cultural resources, none of which were recorded on or adjacent to the project site. These resources are listed below in Table 1.

Table 1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Within ½ Mile of the Project Site

Primary NRHP/ Relationship Number Resource Type Description Recorder(s) and Year(s) CRHR Status to Project Site

P-19-004782 Historic site San Gabriel Southern G. Pacheco, B. Kendig Unknown Outside Pacific Railroad Depot and I. Doumanoff 2016

P-19-186112 Historic structure Union Pacific Railroad S. Ashkar 1999; R.F. Not eligible Outside segment Herbert 2002; R. Ramirez and F. Smith 2009; F. Smith and J. Steely 2009

P-1866775 Historic structure Four-story commercial J. Marvin and J. Michalsky Not eligible Outside property 2001

P-19-188611 Historic building Cabinet City S. Edwards, K. Harper and Not eligible Outside F. Smith 2009

P-19-188613 Historic structure Union Pacific Railroad F. Smith and J. Steely Not eligible Outside bridge 2009

P-19-188614 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188615 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188616 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 17

Primary NRHP/ Relationship Number Resource Type Description Recorder(s) and Year(s) CRHR Status to Project Site

P-19-188617 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188618 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188619 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188620 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; S. Edwards and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188621 Historic building Industrial property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; F. Smith 2009

P-19-188622 Historic object San Gabriel Boulevard S. Murray and F. Smith Not eligible Outside ornamental street 2009 lights

P-19-188623 Historic structure Union Pacific Railroad F. Smith and J. Steely Not eligible Outside culvert 2009

P-19-188624 Historic building Industrial property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; S. Edwards and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188625 Historic building Single family property B. Shawn and F. Smith Not eligible Outside

P-19-188626 Historic building Single family property B. Shawn and F. Smith Not eligible Outside

P-19-188627 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; B. Shawn and F. Smith

P-19-188628 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; B. Shawn and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188629 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; B. Shawn and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188630 Historic building Single family property S. Murray and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188631 Historic building Single family property S. Murray and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188632 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; S. Murray and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188633 Historic building Single family property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; S. Murray and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188636 Historic building Commercial property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

Records Search and Outreach

Primary NRHP/ Relationship Number Resource Type Description Recorder(s) and Year(s) CRHR Status to Project Site

P-19-188637 Historic building Single family property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188638 Historic building Euphoria Design House S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-188639 Historic building Industrial property McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside 1999; S. Edwards and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188640 Historic building Commercial/industrial S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside property 2009

P-19-188641 Historic building Commercial/industrial S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside property 2009

P-19-188642 Historic building Commercial/industrial S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside property 2009

P-19-188643 Historic building Commercial/industrial S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside property

P-19-188644 Historic building Commercial/industrial S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside property

P-19-188645 Historic building Mueller Gages S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside Company

P-19-188646 Historic building Industrial property S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside

P-19-188647 Historic building Alpha Science Tech S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside Corp

P-19-188648 Historic building Filterline Corporation S. Edwards and F. Smith Not eligible Outside

P-19-188649 Historic building Commercial/industrial McMorris and Mikesell Not eligible Outside property 1999; S. Edwards and F. Smith 2009

P-19-188650 Historic building Beisser Motor Werks K. Harper and F. Smith Not eligible Outside 2009

P-19-190503 Historic structure Southern California W.L. Tinsley Becker 2010 Not eligible Outside Edison Company Mesa-Ravendale-Rush 66kV Transmission Line

P-19-192334 Historic building Mission Lodge Nursing H. Haas 2017 Not eligible Outside Home

Source: South Central Coastal Information Center 2018

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 19

The SCCIC records search also identified 17 previously conducted cultural resources studies in the records search area. None were within the project site, and three reports (LA-8209, LA-12141, and LA-6008) were adjacent to the project site. These studies are listed in Table 2.

Table 2 Previously Conducted Cultural Resources Studies Within ½ Mile of the Project Site.

Report Relationship Number Author(s) Year Title to Project Site

LA-04835 Ashkar, Shahira 1999 Cultural Resources Inventory Report for Williams Outside Communications, Inc. Proposed Fiber Optic Cable System Installation Project, Los Angeles to Riverside, Los Angeles and Riverside Counties

LA-05457 McKenna, Jeanette 2000 A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Proposed Outside A. San Gabriel Towne Center Project Area, in the City of San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California

LA-06008 Duke, Curt 2003 Cultural Resource Assessment Cingular Wireless Facility No. Adjacent Vy 272-02 Los Angeles County, California

LA-06308 Duke, Curt 2002 Cultural Resource Assessment Cingular Wireless Facility No. Outside Vy 178-01 Los Angeles County, California

LA-06316 Duke, Curt and 2001 Cultural Resource Assessment at & T Wireless Services Outside Marvin, Judith Facility No. R236 Los Angeles County, California

LA-06329 Unknown 2002 Supplemental Archival Research and Determination of Outside Effect for the Alameda Corridor-east Project San Gabriel Trench and Crossings #2 and #3

LA-08209 Bonner, Wayne H. 2005 Cultural Resource Assessment at & T Wireless Services Adjacent Facility No. R236 Los Angeles County, California

LA-08699 Bonner, Wayne H. 2006 Cultural Resources Records Search Results and Site Visit for Outside Royal Street Communications, Llc Candidate La0123b (san Gabriel Self Storage), 126-128 East Las Tunas Drive, San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California

LA-09240 Bonner, Wayne H. 2007 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Outside T-Mobile Candidate LA2284B (SCE Burton), 1210 East Las Tunas Drive, San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California

LA-10175 Unknown 2009 Confidential Cultural Resources Specialist Report for the Outside Tehachapi Transmission Project

LA-10513 Smith, Francesca 2009 Historic Property Survey Report for the San Gabriel Trench Outside and Robert Ramirez Grade Separation Project

LA-12009 Ferland, Sara, Laura 2012 Archaeological Testing and Monitoring of the Southern Outside Hoffman, and John California Gas Company Mission Road Pipeline Dietler Replacement Project, City of San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California: Addendum to the Archaeological Evaluation Report for the San Gabriel Trench Grade

LA-12141 Bonner, Wayne, 2012 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Adjacent Sarah Williams, and T-Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE04409A (LA409 LA409-00- Kathleen Crawford PB) 105 North San Gabriel Boulevard, San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California

Records Search and Outreach

Report Relationship Number Author(s) Year Title to Project Site

LA-12142 Bonner, Wayne, 2012 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Outside Sarah Williams, and T-Mobile West, LLC Candidate IE04395A (VY178 San Gabriel Kathleen Crawford Self Storage) 128 East Las Tunas Drive, San Gabriel, Los Angeles County, California

LA-12673 Dietler, John and 2010 Treatment Plan for CA-LAN-184H and Three Archaeological Outside Caprice Harper Resource Locations for the San Gabriel Trench Grade Separation Project, Cities of San Gabriel, Alhambra, and Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California

LA-12674 Harper, Caprice, 2010 Finding of Adverse Effect for the San Gabriel Trench Grade Outside Francesca Smith Separation Project, Cities of San Gabriel, Alhambra, and and Sara Dietler Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California

LA-12825 Haas, Hannah and 2014 KB Home Southern California Mission Lodge Housing Project Outside Robert Ramirez

Source: South Central Coastal Information Center 2018

Maps depicting Native American village locations in the San Gabriel Valley area of Los Angeles County show a village site appearing to be directly in the vicinity of the current project site and several known village sites in the general vicinity of the Mission San Gabriel Arcángel (Los Angeles County 1938; Flaherty 2016; McCawley 1996:41). According to historic aerial images, the project site has been developed with industrial infrastructure since at least 1948, though it appears that the structures and surrounding area have been substantially altered throughout subsequent years (NETRonline 2018). Aerial photos from United States Geological Survey (USGS) indicate that the project site was developed as far back as 1928 (USGS 1928). According to Sanborn Maps, the project site has been developed since at least 1925, when an office and several other buildings are present (Sanborn 1925). 4.2 Native American Outreach

Rincon assisted the City of San Gabriel with AB 52 consultation as required by CEQA by providing Michael Baker International with instructions, legislation information, draft letters and maps, and a correspondence tracking sheet to be used for formal consultation. The City is currently conducting government-to-government consultation with interested Native Americans in accordance with AB 52. Information relating to AB 52 consultation at the time of this report is presented in Attachment B.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 21

5 Field Survey

Rincon Architectural Historian Rachel Perzel conducted a survey of the project site and surrounding area on March 15, 2018. The field survey of the property consisted of a visual inspection of all built environment features at the project site, including buildings, structures, and associated features to assess their overall condition and integrity, and to identify and document any potential character- defining features. Ms. Perzel documented the survey using field notes and digital photographs (Figures 3-5). Copies of the field notes and digital photographs from both surveys are on file with Rincon’s Ventura office. The results of this survey are in a separate Historic Built Environment Report. Because the project site is occupied entirely by structures, pavement, and landscaping, an archaeological survey was not completed. Figure 3 220_224 South San Gabriel

Field Survey

Figure 4 Project Site Location

Figure 5 Project Site

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 23

6 Findings and Recommendations

The results of the cultural resources records search conducted by Rincon did not identify any prehistoric or historic cultural resources on the project site; however, numerous resources are located within the records search radius. In addition, further inquiries and research by Rincon determined that the region surrounding the project site was once densely inhabited by Native American communities. The project site has been developed for at least 70 years and does not currently appear to have any undisturbed ground surfaces. Although the project site is developed and has likely been altered by modern and historic development, the proximity of the project site to Mission San Gabriel Arcángel, the Rubio Wash, and several Native American villages suggests that the site is located in an area with a high or medium potential for the presence of prehistoric cultural resources (City of San Gabriel 2017). Additionally, the presence of buildings historically points to the likelihood of buried historical-period resources. Rincon understands that areas of sensitivity are to be determined by the City of San Gabriel’s Cultural Resource Sensitivity Map; however, such a map is not currently available. The evidence presented in this report suggests that the project site is sensitive for cultural resources and intact and potentially significant cultural deposits may exist beneath the project site. Thus, the possibility of impacting subsurface cultural resources during ground disturbing activities for the project exists. Rincon recommends a finding of less than significant impact to historical resources with mitigation incorporated for the purposes of CEQA, and a recommends a Workers Environmental Awareness Program training prior to project commencement and archaeological and Native American monitoring during initial ground disturbances associated with the project, and/or until the project monitors determine that monitoring is no longer necessary. These measures are expanded in detail below. This finding and the following mitigation measures are concurrent with the goals and objectives for managing archaeological and Native American cultural resources outlined in the City of San Gabriel’s HPCRO. 6.1 Workers Environmental Awareness Program

A Workers Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training should be prepared to address cultural resources issues anticipated at the project site. The WEAP should include information of the laws and regulations that protect cultural resources, the penalties for a disregard of those laws and regulations, what to do if cultural resources are unexpectedly uncovered during construction, and contact information for a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), who shall be contacted in the case of unanticipated discoveries. The WEAP should include project specific information regarding the potential for and types of prehistoric and historic resources that may potentially be encountered.

Findings and Recommendations

6.2 Archaeological and Native American Monitoring

A qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), should be retained to perform all mitigation measures related to prehistoric and historic cultural resources for the project. An archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be present to monitor all initial ground disturbing activities associated with the project, including but not limited to: removal of building foundations and asphalt, grading of soils, trenching for utilities, excavations associated with development, etcetera. If, during initial ground disturbance, the monitors determine that the ground disturbing activities have little or no potential to impact cultural resources, and/or the monitors determine that ground disturbances would occur within previously disturbed and non-native soils, the qualified archaeologist may recommend that monitoring may be reduced or eliminated. This decision will be made in consultation with the Native American monitor and the City of San Gabriel. The final decision to reduce or eliminate monitoring will be at the discretion of the City of San Gabriel. If cultural resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work within the immediate area must halt and the find must be evaluated for local and/or state significance. Rincon additionally recommends the following measures in case of unanticipated discoveries of cultural resources and/or human remains during project execution. 6.3 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources

If cultural resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work in the immediate area should halt and a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (NPS 1983), should be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data recovery excavation and Native American consultation may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts. 6.4 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains

The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 25

7 References

Arnold, Jeanne E., Michael R. Walsh, and Sandra E. Hollimon 2004 The Archaeology of California. Journal of Archaeological Research 12(1):1-73.

Arnold, Richard J. 2013 San Gabriel. Images of America. Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing.

Bean, Lowell J. and Charles R. Smith 1978 Gabrielino in California. Volume 8: Handbook of North American Indians. Robert F. Heizer, ed. and William C. Sturtevant, general ed. Pp. 539-549. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.

Bean, Walton 1968 California: An Interpretive History. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Blackburn, Thomas 1963 Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrielino Material Culture. Archaeological Survey Annual Report, Vol. 5. University of California, Los Angeles. Salinas, California: Coyote Press.

Byrd, Brian F., and L. Mark Raab 2007 Prehistory of the Southern Bight: Models for a New Millennium in California Prehistory. T.L. Jones and K.A. Klar, eds. Pp. 215-228. New York, New York: Altamira Press.

California Missions Resource Center N.d. San Gabriel Arcángel. Electronic document, online at https://www.missionscalifornia.com/keyfacts/san-gabriel-arcangel.html, accessed March 2, 2018.

City of San Gabriel 1966 San Gabriel Fact Book. San Gabriel, California: San Gabriel City Council.

2004 Ingredients for Success: The Comprehensive General Plan of the City of San Gabriel, California. Resolution No. 04-16.

2017 Ordinance No. 636-C.S. An Ordinance of the City of San Gabriel Updating Chapter 153 of the San Gabriel Municipal Code and Deleting Section 153.410-413 and Replacing it with 153.600-630 Updating the Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Ordinance (Zone Text Amendment).

N.d. History of San Gabriel. Electronic document, online at https://www.sangabrielcity.com/78/History-of-San-Gabriel, accessed March 8, 2018.

References

Couch, Jeffrey S., Joanne S. Couch and Nancy Anastasia Wiley 2009 Saved by the Well: The Keystone Cache at CA-ORA-83, the Cogged Stone Site. Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 21:147-156.

Deverell, William 1994 Railroad Crossing: Californians and the Railroad, 1850-1910. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Dillon, Brian D. 2002 California Paleo-Indians: Lack of Evidence, or Evidence of a Lack? in Essays in California Archaeology: A Memorial to Franklin Fenenga. W. J. Wallace and F. A. Riddell, eds. Pp. 110– 128. Paper No. 60. University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.

Dixon, Keith A. 1968 Cogged Stones and Other Ceremonial Cache Artifacts in Stratigraphic Context at ORA-58, a Site in the Lower Santa Ana River Drainage, Orange County. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 4(3):57-65.

Eberhart, Hal 1961 The Cogged Stones of Southern California. American Antiquity 26(3):361-370.

Engelhardt, Zephyrin 1927 San Gabriel Mission and the Beginning of Los Angeles. San Gabriel, California: Mission San Gabriel.

Erlandson, Jon M. 1991 Early Maritime Adaptations on the Northern Channel Islands in Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California. Volume 1: Perspectives in California Archaeology. Jon M. Erlandson and R. Colten, eds. Pp. 101-111. Los Angeles, California: UCLA Institute of Archaeology Press.

Erlandson, Jon M., Theodore Cooley, and Richard Carrico 1987 A Fluted Projectile Point Fragment from the Southern California Coast: Chronology and Context at CA-SBA-1951. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9(1):120–128.

Flaherty, James 2016 Kizh Tribal Territory (Gabrieleno Indian Lands) Map. Kizh Tribal Press.

Fogelson, Robert M. 1967 The Fragmented Metropolis: Los Angeles, 1850-1930. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Glassow, Michael A., Larry R. Wilcoxen, and Jon M. Erlandson 1988 Cultural and Environmental Change during the Early Period of Santa Barbara Channel Prehistory in The Archaeology of Prehistoric Coastlines. G. Bailey and J. Parkington, eds. Pp. 64–77. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 27

Guinn, James M. 1977 Gold! Gold! Gold! from San Francisquito! in Los Angeles Biography of a City. John Caughey and LaRee Caughey, eds. Berkeley, California: University of California, Berkeley Press.

Harrington, John P. 1942 Cultural Element Distributions: XIX Central California Coast. University of California Anthropological Records 7(1):1-46.

Johnson, John R., Thomas W. Stafford, Jr., Henry O. Ajie, and Don P. Morris 2002 Arlington Springs Revisited in Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium. D. Browne, K. Mitchell and H. Chaney, eds. Pp. 541–545. Santa Barbara, California: USDI Minerals Management Service and the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History.

Johnston, Bernice 1962 California’s Gabrielino Indians. Volume 8: Frederick Webb Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund. Los Angeles, California: Southwest Museum.

Jones, Terry L. and Kathryn A. Klar 2007 California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press.

Jones, Terry L., Richard T. Fitzgerald, Douglas J. Kennett, Charles Miksicek, John L. Fagan, John Sharp and Jon M. Erlandson 2002 The Cross Creek Site (CA-SLO-1797) and Its Implications for New World Colonization. American Antiquity 67(2):213–230.

King, Chester D. 1994 Native American Placenames in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreational Area, Agoura Hills. Topanga Anthropological Consultants. Report on file, Topanga Anthropological Consultants, Topanga, California.

Koerper, Henry C., and Christopher E. Drover 1983 Chronology Building for Coastal Orange County: The Case from CA-ORA-119-A. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 19(2):1–34.

Koerper, Henry C., Roger D. Mason, and Mark L. Peterson 2002 Complexity, Demography, and Change in Late Holocene Orange County in Catalysts to Complexity: Late Holocene Societies of the California Coast. Volume 6: Perspectives in California Archaeology. Jon M. Erlandson and Terry L. Jones, eds. Pp. 63–81. Los Angeles, California: Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Kowta, Makoto 1969 The Sayles Complex, A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from the Cajon Pass and the Ecological Implications of its Scraper Planes. University of California Publications in Anthropology 6:35– 69. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

References

Kroeber, Alfred L. 1976 Handbook of the Indians of California. New York, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Langenwalter, Paul E. II, Mathew A. Boxt, Lawrence M. Boxt, M.D., and Theodore T. Miller, M.D. 2001 A Sea Otter (Enhydra lutris) Femur with Embedded Projectile Point Fragment from a Late Prehistoric Camp Site in Long Beach, California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 37(1).

Los Angeles County 1938 Principal Historic Sites, Old Highways, Battlefields: Spanish, Mexican, Early American in Old Los Angeles County Map. History Department, Los Angeles Public Library.

Los Angeles Times 1891 1880-1890, The Avenue of a Decade, Wonders that Ten Years Have Wrought in Los Angeles County.

1925 Los Angeles County, First in America. January 1, 1924.

Mason, Roger D., and Mark L. Peterson 1994 Newport Coast Archaeological Project: Newport Coast Settlement Systems–Analysis and Discussion, Volume 1, part 1 of 2. Prepared by The Keith Companies. Report on file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.

McCawley, William 1996 The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Banning, California: Malki Museum, Press.

McWilliams, Carey 1946 Southern California: An Island on the Land. Layton, Utah: Gibbs Smith, Publisher.

Mithun, Marianne 1999 The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press.

Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.

National Park Service (NPS) 1983 Archaeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. Electronic document, online at http://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/Arch_Standards.htm, accessed May 19, 2017.

NETRonline 2018 Historic Aerials 600 S. San Gabriel Boulevard, San Gabriel, California. Electronic document, online at https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer, accessed De March 6, 2018.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 29

Nevin, David 1978 The Mexican War. Alexandria, Virginia: Time-Life Books, Inc.

O’Neil, Stephen 2002 The Acjachemen in the Franciscan Mission System: Demographic Collapse and Social Change. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology, California State University, Fullerton.

Poole, Jean Bruce 2002 El Pueblo: The Historic Heart of Los Angeles. Los Angeles, California: Getty Publications.

Rawls, James J. 1984 Indians of California: The Changing Image. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.

Reid, Hugo 1978 Letters on the Los Angeles County Indians in A Scotch Paisano in Old Los Angeles: Hugo Reid’s Life in California, 1832-1852 Derived from his Correspondence. Susanna Bryant Dakin, ed. Los Angeles, California: The University of California Press.

Reinman, Fred M. 1964 Maritime Adaptations on San Nicolas Island, California. University of California Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1963–1964. Pp. 47–80. Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Rick, Torben C., Jon M. Erlandson, and René Vellanoweth 2001 Paleocoastal Marine Fishing on the Pacific Coast of the Americas: Perspectives from Daisy Cave, California. American Antiquity 66(4):595–613.

Rolle, Andrew 2003 California: A History. Wheeling, Illinois: Harlan Davidson, Inc.

Sanborn Library LLC 1925 Historic Sanborn Maps of 220 S. San Gabriel Boulevard, San Gabriel, California, Volume 1, Sheets 12 and 13.

Shipley, William F. 1978 Native Languages of California in California. Volume 8: Handbook of North American Indians. Robert F. Heizer, ed. and William C. Sturtevant, general ed. Pp. 80-90. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.

Shumway, Burgess McK. 2007 California Ranchos: Patented Private Land Grants Listed by County. Rockville, Maryland: Borgo Publishing Press.

References

Sugranes, Eugene 1909 The Old San Gabriel Mission. Los Angeles, California: Father Eugene Sugranes.

True, Delbert L. 1993 Bedrock Milling Elements as Indicators of Subsistence and Settlement Patterns in Northern San Diego County, California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(2):1–26.

United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1928 The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Inquiry # 5220356.9.

Vargas, Benjamin R., John G. Douglass, and Seetha Reddy, eds. 2016 People in a Changing Land: The Archaeology and History of the Ballona in Los Angeles, California. Volume 2: Archaeological Sites and Chronology. SRI Technical Series 94. Tucson, Arizona: SRI Press.

Wallace, William 1955 Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214–230.

1978 Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. in California. Volume 8: Handbook of North American Indians. Robert F. Heizer, ed. and William C. Sturtevant, general ed. Pp. 505-508. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press.

Williams, Jack S. 2005 A Phase One Archaeological Study of 400-412 West Mission Boulevard. Center for Spanish Colonial Research. Submitted to Great Urban Places. Report on file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.

Warren, Claude N. 1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast in Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States. C. Irwin-Williams, ed. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1–14.

Workman, Boyle 1935 The City that Grew. Los Angeles, California: Southland Publication Company.

Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory Report 31

Attachment A [Confidential] Cultural Resources Records Search Results

Attachment B AB 52 Native American Consultations Documentation