E Archaeological/Paleontological Resources
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT AND PALEONTOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
TAYLOR YARD BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P REPARED FOR:
City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering Environmental Management Group 1149 S. Broadway, Suite 600, Mail Stop 939 Los Angeles, CA 90015-2213
P REPARED BY:
ICF International 601 W. Fifth Street, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90071
September 2016
ICF International. 2016. Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment, Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge, Los Angeles County, California. September. (ICF 00006.16). Los Angeles, CA. Management Summary
This archaeological survey and paleontological assessment report was prepared for the proposed Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge Project on behalf of the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering, Environmental Management Group. It presents the results of a cultural resources study conducted by ICF International (ICF) and meets the standards outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act.
The proposed project would be located at the Los Angeles River, with the proposed bridge’s north abutment at Kerr Road and south abutment between Altman Street and Dorris Place. The landing would be within a Los Angeles County river maintenance easement. The neighboring property to the west is the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation, Dorris Place Maintenance Yard. The south bank of the Los Angeles River in the project area is currently used for the Los Angeles River Greenway Trail. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages the Los Angeles River in the project area.
A cultural resources records search was conducted on February 16, 2016, at the South Central Coastal Information Center, located at the University of California, Fullerton. It included a review of all available cultural resources surveys and site records within the project footprint plus a 0.5-mile radius around the project footprint. The results of the literature and records search indicate that 11 cultural resources, all represented by historic architectural features, exist in the 0.5-mile study area buffer.
A pedestrian field survey of the project area was conducted by ICF archaeologist Stephen Bryne on January 21 and February 3, 2016. The survey was conducted along transects spaced no more than 15 meters apart. No archaeological resources were identified during the field survey. Accordingly, there is a low likelihood of encountering archaeological resources during construction activities.
If cultural materials are discovered during construction, all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area should be diverted until a qualified archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find. If changes are made to the proposed project, additional surveying may be required if the proposed changes include areas that were not previously surveyed.
If human remains are discovered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that further disturbances and activities shall cease in any area or nearby area suspected to overlie remains and that the county coroner shall be contacted. Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98, if the remains are thought to be Native American, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will then notify the most likely descendent. Further provisions of PRC Section 5097.98 are to be followed as applicable.
The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC) was asked to conduct a paleontological resources record search for the project area. The NHMLAC responded, saying that it had no recorded fossil localities within the project footprint or the surrounding area. Fossil localities have been found in similar sediments 2 to 3 miles south of the project area, at depths of 20 to 35 feet. Ground disturbances associated with the project would be mostly shallow in nature and, based on geological maps and materials analyzed, unlikely to encounter paleontological resources.
If fossil materials are discovered during construction, all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area shall be diverted until a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the find and
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 MS-i Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Management Summary
make recommendations. If the qualified paleontologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant paleontological resource, additional investigations, possibly including fossil recovery, identification, preparation, curation, and reporting, may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. Construction shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented or it is determined that the materials do not require further investigation.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 MS-ii Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Contents
List of Tables and Figures ...... ii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... iii
Page Management Summary ...... MS-1 Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1-1 Chapter 2 Regulatory Framework ...... 2-1 2.1 California Environmental Quality Act ...... 2-1 2.1.1 Historical Resources ...... 2-1 2.1.2 Paleontological Resources ...... 2-2 2.2 State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.9 ...... 2-2 Chapter 3 Project Description and Location ...... 3-1 Chapter 4 Environmental Setting ...... 4-1 4.1 Physical Environment ...... 4-1 4.1.1 Vegetation ...... 4-1 4.1.2 Wildlife ...... 4-1 4.1.3 Geology and Soils ...... 4-2 4.1.4 Hydrology ...... 4-2 4.2 Prehistoric Setting ...... 4-3 4.2.1 Pleistocene (Pre-9600 cal B.C.) ...... 4-3 4.2.2 Early Holocene (9600 cal B.C. to 5600 cal B.C.) ...... 4-3 4.2.3 Middle Holocene (5600 cal B.C. to 1650 cal B.C.) ...... 4-4 4.2.4 Late Holocene (1650 cal B.C. to cal A.D. 1769) ...... 4-4 4.3 Ethnographic Setting ...... 4-5 4.4 Historic Background ...... 4-6 4.4.1 Project Area ...... 4-6 4.4.2 Taylor Yard ...... 4-7 Chapter 5 Sources Consulted ...... 5-1 5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search ...... 5-1 5.2 Native American Consultation ...... 5-3 5.3 Paleontological Records Search ...... 5-3 Chapter 6 Field Methods ...... 6-1
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 i Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 7 Results and Recommendations ...... 7-1 7.1 Archaeological Resources ...... 7-1 7.2 Paleontological Resources ...... 7-1 Chapter 8 References Cited ...... 8-1
Tables and Figures
Tables Page Table 1. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area ...... 5-1 Table 2. Previous Cultural Resources Studies within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area ...... 5-2 Table 3. Native American Contacts Contacted for this Project ...... 5-3
Figures Follows Page Figure 1 Regional Vicinity Map ...... 3-1 Figure 2 Project Location Map ...... 3-1 Figure 3 Overview of Project Site, Facing Southeast from Near Dorris Place ...... 3-1 Figure 4 Overview of Project Site ...... 3-2
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 ii Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act amsl above mean sea level CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CRHR California Register of Historical Resources HSC Health and Safety Code ICF ICF International LADWP Los Angeles Department of Water and Power MLD Most Likely Descendent NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NHMLAC Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County NHPA National Historic Preservation Act PRC Public Resources Code proposed project Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge Qa Quaternary alluvium Qg Quaternary Stream Channel Deposits
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 iii Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 1 Introduction
The proposed Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge Project would be located at the Los Angeles River, with its north abutment at Kerr Road and its south abutment between Altman Street and Dorris Place. For the proposed project, ICF International (ICF) conducted a cultural resources study in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a paleontological resources study in compliance with CEQA. This report summarizes the findings of the cultural resources study, which included background research, a cultural resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search and Native American consultation, and a cultural resources survey. It also summarizes the findings of the paleontological resources study, which included geological research and fossil a locality search.
Taylor Yard, a former 247-acre rail yard with more than 2 miles of Los Angeles River frontage, is located near downtown Los Angeles, opposite Elysian Park and just north of the Arroyo Seco. It is the largest undeveloped parcel on the Los Angeles River (The River Project 2016).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 1-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 2 Regulatory Framework
2.1 California Environmental Quality Act The proposed project is subject to CEQA. Established in 1970, CEQA directs state and local government entities to analyze and publically disclose environmental impacts of proposed projects. Moreover, it requires the development and adoption of mitigation measures to lessen impacts.
According to Section 21084.1 of CEQA, a project would have a significant adverse environmental impact if it would “cause a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.” As defined under state law in Title 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 4850, a historical resource is “any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that is historically or archaeologically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural history of California.” Historical resource is further defined under Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 15064.5 as a “resource listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).” A resource shall be considered by the lead state agency to be historically significant under CEQA if it meets any of the following criteria for listing in the CRHR.
l The resource is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
l The resource is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
l The resource 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.
l The resource has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
In addition, properties listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places are automatically listed in the CRHR. Therefore, all historic properties under federal preservation law are automatically considered historical resources under CEQA. 2.1.1 Historical Resources California PRC Section 21060.5 defines the term environment to include “objects of historic… significance.” For the purposes of CEQA, “historical resources” are defined at Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The text below is abbreviated and excerpted. 1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission for listing in, the CRHR (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1; Title 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 4850 et seq.). 2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in a historic resource survey meeting the requirements Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 2-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 2
historically 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 that 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 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 agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the CRHR (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1; Title 14 California Code of Regulations, 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 to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. 2.1.2 Paleontological Resources In the State of California, fossil remains are considered to be limited, nonrenewable, and sensitive scientific resources. These resources are afforded protection under CEQA. Paleontological resources are provided protection as historical resources, as discussed in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3). The State CEQA Guidelines define historical resources broadly to include any object, site, area, or place that a lead agency determines to be historically significant. One of the questions listed in the CEQA Environmental Checklist is: “Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and Appendix G, Section V, Part C).
2.2 State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.9 Archaeological sites containing human remains shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of State Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5 and California PRC Section 5097.9. Under HSC 7050.5, if human remains are discovered during any project activity, the county coroner must be notified immediately. If human remains are exposed, HSC Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. Construction must halt in the area of the discovery of human remains, the area of the discovery shall be protected, and consultation and treatment shall occur as prescribed by law. If the remains are determined by the coroner to be Native American, the
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 2-2 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 2
coroner is responsible for contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC, pursuant to Section 5097.98, will immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased person so they can inspect the burial site and make recommendations for treatment or disposal.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 2-3 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 3 Project Description and Location
The proposed project consists of construction of a multi-modal bridge over the Los Angeles River between Elysian Valley on the west and Taylor Yard on the east. The proposed bridge would be designed for bicyclist and pedestrian use and also support emergency vehicles. On the south, the proposed bridge would connect with the existing bikeway along the river. Two Americans with Disabilities Act– (ADA-) compliant ramps would also be constructed in this area. On the north, a 275-foot-long bikeway ramp would be constructed. This proposed ramp would lead to a proposed two-way bike path with buffer along Kerr Road that would connect to San Fernando Road. Nine magnolia trees located along Kerr Road would be removed under the proposed project. Proposed crosswalks would be added at the San Fernando Road/Future Street and Cypress Street/Future Street intersections.
The proposed steel-framed bridge would be approximately 400 feet long and be supported on abutments and a concrete pier in the central portion of the channel. The north abutment would be located along the Los Angeles River maintenance road, and the south abutment would be located along the existing bikeway; both abutments would be adjacent to the top of the channel slopes. The abutment on the north side would include construction of a retaining wall that would range in height from about 5 to 18 feet. The bridge structure itself would be approximately 30 feet high by 24 feet wide. The width of the actual pedestrian and bikeway path would be approximately 18 feet. The pedestrian and bikeway path would descend to the south at an inclination of approximately 3.1 percent.
The proposed design would minimize disruption of the waterway as well as the number of structural supports in the river. The bridge design would include a foundational support pier in the riverbed, which is soft-bottomed in this area. Except for the pier, the bridge would be located above the river’s cross-sectional flow area. There would be an at-grade crossing of an existing railroad on the east side. The proposed project would cross land within the jurisdictions of the City of Los Angeles (City), Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
The proposed bridge would be designed to support two 16-inch Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) water lines for conveying reclaimed water, connecting Elysian Valley to Cypress Park. The scope of LADWP water line installation for this project would start 5 feet south of the masonry wall on the bikeway side, travel underground perpendicular to the bikeway, travel up through the bridge landing, straddle under the bridge deck, travel back underground through the bridge landing, travel through Kerr Road, and connect to an existing water line in San Fernando Road. The lines for the recycled water would be a visible bridge element, hanging under the bridge deck. The water lines represent an investment in recycled- water infrastructure that the City is making.
The location of the proposed project is shown in the project vicinity and project location maps (Figures 1 and 2). The project location is shown on the U.S. Geological Survey Los Angeles and Hollywood 7.5-minute quadrangle maps (Figure 3). A photo of the project site is provided in Figure 4.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 3-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Los Angeles C o u n t y Brand Park B u rb a C n h k a W n n e e s t l e r 210 n ¦¨§ Glendale ST159 Verdug o S W a e sh A
La River Channel c Burbank r o r o W y
o ST134 a s
h ST710 Eagle Rock Adams Rock Griffith Square 110 Park ST
ST2
Garvanza Highland Highland Olga Park South Pasadena Project Site Pasadena Hollywood ¦¨§5 ST110 ST2 ^_ o Sec ST2 yo el El Sereno ro nn Happy r ha Happy Echo A C Echo Valley Park Aurant ¤£101
Los ¦¨§10 Angeles City Terrace
¦¨§10 East Los Boyle ¨710 ¦§ Angeles Heights Kern ST60
San Bernardino Redondo Los Angeles ¦¨§110 Clement Junction ST72 Junction Nevin Riverside ± Orange 0 0.5 1 2 Vernon P a c i f i c San Diego Miles O c e a n Commerce Source: ESRI StreetMap North America (2010) USA MEXICO K:\Los Angeles\Projects\LABOE_Taylor_Bridge\00006_16\mapdoc\Fig01_Vicinity_Map.mxd Date: 2/3/2016 24991 Angeles\Projects\LABOE_Taylor_Bridge\00006_16\mapdoc\Fig01_Vicinity_Map.mxd K:\Los Figure 1 Project Vicinity Taylor Yard Bikeway/Pedestrian Bridge
Legend Existing Multi-Use Bike & Pedestrian Path Proposed 2-way Bike Path & Pedestrian Path Proposed Continental Crosswalks Proposed Pedestrian & Cyclist Bridge Facility 1 9 9 4 2
6 1 0 2 / 0 2 / 9
: e t a D d x m . n o i t a c o L _ t c e j o r P _ 2 0 e r u g i F \ l a r u t l u C \ c o d p a m \ d r a Y r o l y a T _ 6 1 _ 6 0 0 0 0 \
E ±
O 0 500 1,000 B A L \ 1 Feet _ s t
c Source: USGS 7.5' Quad, CA: e j Los Angeles (1982), o r Hollywood (1982) P \ : K Figure 2 Project Location Taylor Yard Bikeway/Pedestrian Bridge
Legend Existing Multi-Use Bike & Pedestrian Path Proposed 2-way Bike Path & Pedestrian Path Proposed Continental Crosswalks Proposed Pedestrian & Cyclist Bridge Facility
± 0 500 1,000
Feet Source: USGS 7.5' Quad, CA: Los Angeles (1982), Hollywood (1982) K:\Projects_1\LABOE\00006_16_TaylorYard\mapdoc\Cultural\Figure02_Project_Location.mxd Date: 24991 9/20/2016 K:\Projects_1\LABOE\00006_16_TaylorYard\mapdoc\Cultural\Figure02_Project_Location.mxd Figure 3 Project Location Taylor Yard Bikeway/Pedestrian Bridge
Graphics TG … 00006.16 (9-19-2016) Figure 4 Overview of Project Site, Facing Southeast from Near Dorris Place
Chapter 4 Environmental Setting
4.1 Physical Environment The project area is located within the northeastern San Fernando Valley, a broad, level expanse of land that comprises more than 260 square miles and is almost completely encircled by mountain ranges. The elevation of the valley floor varies from about 600 to 1,200 feet above mean sea level (amsl).
The project area is surrounded by a neighborhood that has a mix of industrial buildings, commercial buildings, and residential dwellings. Much of the landscape within the project area currently consists of vacant land north of the Los Angeles River, on the former site of the Taylor Yard. Kerr Road runs along the northern boundary of the project area, with Rio De Los Angeles State Park north of the project footprint. The area northeast of the project area, along San Fernando Road, consists of largely light industrial and commercial buildings. To the south of the Los Angeles River, on the southern end of the project area, are postwar-era industrial buildings along the river, with single- family residential dwellings located farther to the south. 4.1.1 Vegetation The broad expanse of the San Fernando Valley is characterized by plants of the valley grassland community, with areas of coastal sage scrub along the lower hills. Plants of the southern oak woodland community are found in well-watered valleys and canyons. Oak trees were abundant in the San Fernando Valley before European settlement (Gumprecht 2001:24).
Wetlands and woodlands once thrived along the Los Angeles River. Immense stands of alder, cottonwood, oak, sycamore, and willow grew along the banks of the river, along with wild roses and wild grapes (Gumprecht 2001:9; Morrison and Lamonica 2001:29). Early Spanish explorers noted the presence of marshes and tule patches along the river (Gumbrecht 2001:15). Clumps of alder, hackberry, and shrubs formed a dense undergrowth beneath the trees of the willow-cottonwood forest (Gumprecht 2001:20).
In the Glendale Narrows section of the Los Angeles River, an open woodland that was dominated by oak and California walnut grew on the slopes that flank the river. In this area of the San Fernando Valley, though willows, tules, and giant reeds dominated the riverbanks, yuccas and cacti were likely to grow in areas that were less prone to flooding. The dry washes north of the river featured juniper, prickly pear, and yucca (Gumprecht 2001:23). 4.1.2 Wildlife Wildlife was abundant along the Los Angeles River’s course. Large mammals included deer, antelope, coyote, gray fox, grizzly bear, and mountain lion (Gumprecht 2001:25). Steelhead and other fish spawned in the streams. The Los Angeles River once contained a thriving steelhead trout population (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:24). Birds included hawks, condors, cuckoos, owls, vireos, woodpeckers, doves, pigeons, quail, swans, ducks, gulls, and geese. Native grasses were home to gophers, badgers, shrews, and moles. Turtles inhabited the small ponds and muskrats fed on the tules and cattails (Gumprecht 2001:25).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
4.1.3 Geology and Soils A geologic map of the area (Dibblee 1989) indicates that the proposed project’s bridge abutments are underlain by Quaternary alluvium (Qa). The alluvium is composed of unconsolidated silt, sand, and gravel. The Los Angeles River channel in the project area is underlain by Quaternary stream channel deposits (Qg), which are composed of gravel, sand, and silt (Dibblee 1989). These deposits are described as Holocene in age (10,000 years ago to present) (Dibblee 1989). Both of these sediments are too young to contain fossil resources. The project area is within the floodplain of the Los Angeles River; recent Holocene deposits are likely to be substantial in this river channel environment. However, these sediments are underlain, at varying depths, by older Quaternary alluvium, older than 10,000 years, which does have the potential to encompass significant fossil resources (Mcleod 2016).
Bedrock in nearby hills is mapped as the Monterey Formation, which is described by Dibblee Jr. (1989) as sandstone with interbedded shale (City of Los Angeles 2015:2). This geological unit may also underlie the project area at great depth. However, two geotechnical borings for the project did not reach bedrock at depths of 81.5 feet from the surface of the existing channel edges (City of Los Angeles 2015:52–59)
The proposed project’s bridge abutments are adjacent to the top of the existing Los Angeles River. The channel and slope are currently maintained by USACE. The slopes are lined with concrete. On each side of the channel, there is a 15-foot-wide paved bikeway/pedestrian path adjacent to the top of slope (City of Los Angeles 2015:3).
The near-surface soils at each of the proposed abutments consist of undocumented fill that was most likely placed during construction of the channel. The undocumented fill thickness at the north and south abutments is approximately 19 and 20 feet, respectively. The undocumented fill consists mostly of poorly graded sand, poorly graded sand with silt, and gravel (City of Los Angeles 2015:3). 4.1.4 Hydrology The Los Angeles River begins in the San Fernando Valley in Canoga Park, where Bell Creek and Calabasas Creek converge in a concrete channel (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:24). From there, the river flows through 11 cities to its end at the harbor in Long Beach. Notable tributaries of the Los Angeles River in the San Fernando Valley include Tujunga Wash, Dayton Creek, Caballero Creek, Bull Wash, Pacoima Wash, and Verdugo Wash.
Historically, much of the river’s waters never reached the sea, instead spreading over the countryside and joining with springs flowing from the surrounding hills to form vast marshes, shallow lakes, and small ponds (Gumprecht 2001:9). In other places, the river sank into the ground, with its bed dry for most of the year. Today, the river is largely seasonal (i.e., it swells and shrinks with the seasons, spawning small streams that last only as long as the water does) (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:33).
Flood control projects made the Los Angeles River what it is today. Catastrophic floods in 1914, 1934, and 1938 led to the creation of a comprehensive regional flood control program (Gumprecht 2001:3). Devices were built in the foothills to catch rocks, trees, and other debris that would pour from the mountains during storms. Massive flood control reservoirs were constructed on the lowlands to regulate peak streamflows. Between 1936 and 1958, the river itself was straightened,
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-2 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
deepened, and widened and its new channel was lined with concrete to provide floodwaters the quickest route to the sea (Gumprecht 2001:3; Morrison and Lamonica 2001). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control projects moved 20,000,000 cubic yards of earth, set almost 150,000,000 pounds of reinforcing steel, and poured 2,000,000 cubic yards of concrete (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:74). The 1938 flood unearthed part of the river’s newly poured concrete bed and washed it out to sea.
Several miles of the river, from the Bette Davis picnic grounds in Griffith Park to Dodger Stadium, have a “natural bottom,” meaning it is not completely concrete (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:74).
4.2 Prehistoric Setting Prehistoric archaeological sites in California are places where Native Americans lived or carried out activities during the prehistoric period, before 1769 A.D. Prehistoric sites contain artifacts and subsistence remains, and they may contain human burials. Artifacts are objects made by people and include tools (e.g., projectile points, scrapers, grinding implements), waste products, ceremonial items, and rock art. Subsistence remains include the inedible portions of foods, such as animal bone and shell, and edible parts that were lost and not consumed, such as charred seeds.
The following summary of the prehistory of Southern California is based on Byrd and Raab (2007), which in turn is based on Erlandson and Colten’s (1991:1–2) division of the Late Holocene into Early, Middle, and Late subdivisions. 4.2.1 Pleistocene (Pre-9600 cal. B.C.) Traditional models of California prehistory suggest that the state’s first inhabitants were Paleo- Indian big-game hunters who ranged across North America during the closing phases of the last Ice Age (Fagan 2003; Moratto 1984; Wallace 1978). However, evidence for Paleo-Indian occupation of Southern California, particularly for coastal areas, remains scant. As the Wisconsin Ice Age began to wane, warming and drying conditions, between about 10,000 and 8000 cal. B.C., are thought to have triggered far-reaching cultural responses in California. In the desert interior, lakes and streams that were once fed by moist Pleistocene climatic conditions began to shrink. At the same time, cultures that were dependent on these lacustrine environments, subsumed under the heading of a Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition, responded by exploiting a wider range of plant and animal species and migrating to regions with more favorable moisture conditions, including the Southern California coast (Byrd and Raab 2007:217–218). 4.2.2 Early Holocene (9600 cal. B.C. to 5600 cal. B.C.) After this initial settlement, coastal groups gradually adopted marine foods such as shellfish and fish, particularly after post-Pleistocene sea-level rise created estuaries and bays. In this context, shellfish were interpreted as a dietary staple; plant resources (including nuts and grasses) were also important, with hunting and fishing less important (Byrd and Raab 2007:218–219). Radiocarbon evidence shows occupation of the coastal region between ca. 8000 and 7000 cal. B.C. (Byrd and Raab 2007:219).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-3 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
4.2.3 Middle Holocene (5600 cal. B.C. to 1650 cal. B.C.) The Middle Holocene has been traditionally seen as a time of transition, during which Early Holocene cultural adaptations were gradually modified into forms that are recognizable during the Late Holocene. Across much of central and Southern California, millingstone cultures appeared around 6000–5000 cal. B.C. This adaptation focused on the collection and processing of small plant seeds and the hunting of a variety of small- and medium-sized game animals (Byrd and Raab 2007:219). This adaptive strategy, referred to as the Millingstone Horizon, is viewed as remaining unchanged for several thousand years. Traditional reconstruction of Middle Holocene occupation on the mainland has emphasized sizeable semi-sedentary populations that were focused around resource-rich coastal bays and estuaries (Byrd and Raab 2007:219).
Today, Middle Holocene occupation of the mainland region is recognized as considerably more diverse than initially posited (Byrd and Raab 2007:220). For example, Middle Holocene sites have been documented in inland settings, while considerable variability is recognized in adaptive strategies throughout the region (Byrd and Raab 2007:220). In addition, evidence has emerged of geographically expansive trade networks and spheres of cultural interaction, linking Southern California with a vast region of the American West during the Middle Holocene (Byrd and Raab 2007:220).
At some time or times in prehistory, it has been hypothesized that speakers of Uto-Aztecan languages migrated from the Great Basin across Southern California and eventually colonized the Channel Islands. The movement of these peoples across Southern California is thought to have displaced resident groups, creating a distinctive “Shoshonean wedge” of speakers of Uto-Aztecan languages across Southern California (Kroeber 1925). 4.2.4 Late Holocene (1650 cal. B.C. to cal. A.D. 1769) Traditional models indicate that the Late Holocene was a time period during which cultural patterns and tribal groups that were observable by early Euro-American explorers and settlers emerged (Byrd and Raab 2007:222). Sometime after cal. A.D. 500, the bow and arrow appeared, with ceramics adopted after A.D. 1000, at the start of (or during) the Late Prehistoric period. Recent research has revealed that this period has more complex and dynamic regional and local patterns of change than was previously thought (Byrd and Raab 2007:223). For example, culture change may have been rapid rather than gradual, and periods of cultural stress were not limited to post-contact times but occurred periodically during the prehistoric era as well.
Although marine resources remained extremely important during the Late Holocene, major shifts took place in subsistence practices, settlement patterns, and the organization of labor. During this time period, hunter-gatherers in Southern California increasingly focused on smaller resources that generally occurred in greater amounts, often referred to as resource intensification (Byrd and Raab 2007:223).
Late Holocene settlement patterns are characterized by comparatively large residential camps that were linked to numerous ephemeral satellite sites. Site types include major residential bases, residential camps, and limited activity sites. The smaller sites were non-randomly distributed short- term encampments, some of which were dedicated to specialized subsistence tasks (Byrd and Raab 2007:224).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-4 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
4.3 Ethnographic Setting The project area lies within the territory of the Gabrielino Native American people (Bean and Smith 1978). The Gabrielino are characterized as one of the most complex societies in native southern California, second perhaps only to the Chumash, their coastal neighbors to the northwest. This complexity derives from their overall economic, ritual, and social organization (Bean and Smith 1978:538; Kroeber 1925:621; McCawley 1996; Miller 1991). The Gabrielino are named for the Mission San Gabriel, one of two Spanish missions established in what is now Los Angeles County. Some descendants of the Gabrielino prefer to be called Tongva, or Tobikhar, the latter of which means settlers (Gumprecht 2001:28).
The Gabrielino, a Uto-Aztecan (or Shoshonean) group, may have entered the Los Angeles Basin as recently as 1500 B.P. In early protohistoric times, the Gabrielino occupied a large territory including the entire Los Angeles Basin. This region encompasses the coast from Malibu to Aliso Creek, parts of the Santa Monica Mountains, the San Fernando Valley, the San Gabriel Valley, the San Bernardino Valley, the northern parts of the Santa Ana Mountains, and much of the middle to the lower Santa Ana River. They also occupied the islands of Santa Catalina, San Clemente, and San Nicolas.
Within this large territory were more than 50 residential communities with populations ranging from 50 to 150 individuals. The Gabrielino had access to a broad and diverse resource base. This wealth of resources, coupled with an effective subsistence technology, well developed trade network, and ritual system, resulted in a society that was among one of the most materially wealthy and culturally sophisticated cultural groups in California at the time of contact.
Inland Gabrielino communities were situated near major rivers, but in some cases they were also located near the foothill-transition zone (McCawley 1996:55). The Gabrielino often built their villages in close proximity to the region’s rivers and streams, reliant as they were on the riparian environment for food and raw materials from which they made their dwellings, clothing, and tools (Gumprecht 2001:27). The Gabrielino seem to have selected sites for their villages based largely on the location of water sources, no doubt because of the scarcity of water in the region and the greater food supplies that would have been available near streams and standing bodies of water (Gumprecht 2001:29). Many settlements in Southern California were at the foot of mountain canyons near year-round springs. Others were located along the region’s rivers and streams, though usually at a sufficient distance or on ground high enough to ensure their safety in time of flood (Gumprecht 2001:29).
Gabrielino villages seem to have been most abundant in the San Fernando Valley, in the area north of downtown Los Angeles known as the Glendale Narrows, and around the river’s various outlets to the sea (Gumprecht 2001:31). The Gabrielino community of Yangna or Yaanga is regarded as the Native American precursor to the present-day city of Los Angeles (McCawley 1995:57). Although the exact location of the village has not been determined, it probably occupied a large area west of the river near the present location of Union Station in downtown Los Angeles (Gumprecht 2001:29).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-5 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
4.4 Historic Background 4.4.1 Project Area On August 2, 1769, the Spanish first encountered the river, which they named El Rio y Valle de Nuestra Señora la Reina de Los Angeles de la Porciuncula, meaning The River and Valley of Our Lady Queen of the Angels of the Porciuncula, for the feast day honoring St. Francis of Assisi’s tiny chapel in Italy, the Porziuncola (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:20). Eighty years later, American soldiers mapped it as Rio de Los Angeles, the Los Angeles River (Morrison and Lamonica 2001:20).
Spanish occupation of California began in 1769, at San Diego. Mission San Gabriel was established in the Los Angeles Basin in 1771, and the Los Angeles Pueblo was established as a civilian settlement on September 4, 1781. The city of Los Angeles began as the Los Angeles Pueblo. It was established as a civilian settlement at the behest of the Spanish royal governor of California. Eleven families, a total of 44 people, recruited as colonists from Sinaloa, Mexico, founded the village of Nuestra Señora de la Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula on September 4, 1781. The first structures there, built in the fall of 1781, are described as “a dozen or so adobe structures surrounded by wooden palisades.” This village housed 44 people, with a military guard of four soldiers (Dillon 1994). The Pueblo of Los Angeles is thought by some to have been started as a ranching area, but the Pueblo also produced grain. By 1800, the village consisted of 30 adobes surrounding a central plaza, including a town hall, barracks, bodege (storehouse), and a calabozo (jail), surrounded by an adobe wall (Dillon 1994).
In the San Fernando Valley, Mission San Fernando Rey de España was founded on September 8, 1797, by Father Fermin Lasuen. Father Lasuen selected a prime location along the principal highway leading to the Pueblo de Los Angeles.
Mexico rebelled against Spain in 1810, and by 1821, Mexico, including California, achieved independence. The Mexican Republic began to grant private land to citizens to encourage immigration to California. Huge land grant ranchos took up large sections of land in California. In 1833, Mexico declared an end to the missions and secularized the religious order’s land holdings. In 1845, Governor Pio Pico declared the Mission San Fernando Rey de Espana buildings for sale and, in 1846, sold the secularized lands from the mission to Eulogio de Celis. The grant became known as Ex-Mission San Fernando. The grant, which was supposed to contain 14 square leagues, was bounded on the north by Rancho San Francisco and the Santa Susana Mountains, on the west by the Simi Hills, on the east by Rancho Tujunga, and on the south by the Santa Monica Mountains. When the Rancho Ex-Mission San Fernando grant was patented in 1873, it was surveyed at nearly 26 square leagues, the single largest land grant in California.
Before the De Celis grant, Andres Pico, brother of Governor Pío Pico, had leased the Rancho Ex- Mission San Fernando in 1845. In 1853, Andrés Pico acquired an undivided half interest, and Rancho Ex-Mission San Fernando was split in half, along present day Roscoe Boulevard, between Andrés Pico, who had the southern half of the ranch to the Santa Monica Mountains, and Eulogio de Celis, who had the northern half of the ranch to the Santa Susana Mountains.
In debt, Andrés Pico had sold his southern half interest in the Rancho Ex-Mission San Fernando to his brother Pío Pico in 1862. Pio Pico sold his half share of the Ex-Mission San Fernando land to Isaac Lankershim (operating as the San Fernando Farm Homestead Association) in 1869. In 1873, Isaac Lankershim's son, James Boon Lankershim, and future son-in-law, Isaac Newton Van Nuys,
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-6 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
moved to the San Fernando Valley and took over management of the property. In 1874, dry farming of wheat was introduced by J. B. Lankershim and Isaac Van Nuys and became very productive for their San Fernando Homestead Association.
After De Celis died in 1869, his son, Eulogio F. de Celis, returned from Spain to Los Angeles. In 1874, the heirs of Eulogio de Celis sold their northern half of Rancho Ex-Mission San Fernando to California State Senator Charles Maclay and his partners, George K. Porter, a San Francisco shoe manufacturer, and his brother, Benjamin F. Porter. The Porters’ land was west of present-day Sepulveda, and the Maclay land was east of Sepulveda Boulevard.
After the construction and opening of the Los Angeles Aqueduct (Owens Valley Aqueduct) in 1913, farming expanded to include irrigated crops and orchards. Independent valley towns gradually voted for annexation to the city for the benefit of being connected to the municipal water system. Rural areas were annexed by Los Angeles in 1915, more than doubling the size of the city. In the early 20th century, population growth pushed urbanization into the San Fernando Valley, a trend that accelerated after World War II. By 1960, the valley had a population of well over 1 million. 4.4.2 Taylor Yard In 1781, the Pueblo of Los Angeles was established on the west bank of the Los Angeles River. An alignment, now known as San Fernando Road, was the major access route between the pueblo and Mission San Fernando (The River Project 2016). The area was part of the one of the first and largest original land grants made to the Mexican and Spanish settlers to establish the Pueblo of Los Angeles. Known as Rancho San Raphael, a 36,000-acre land grant was made to Jose Maria Verdugo on October 20, 1784, by Governor Gages.
California was admitted to the Union in 1850. In 1871, the U.S. Land Commission confirmed the Rancho San Rafael land grant to the Verdugo family (The River Project 2016).
The land was subdivided in 1881 and sold to Andrew Glassell, Alexis Jeffries, Harriet Atwater Paramour, and others. Early development in the area consisted of agriculture, a few homes along Figueroa Street, and summer cottages in the hills overlooking the Arroyo Seco. Mount Washington began attracting artists in the 1890s (The River Project 2016).
Starting in the late 1890s, the site was owned by J. Hartley Taylor. Mr. Taylor was a prolific entrepreneur who owned the Taylor Grocery and the Taylor Milling Company, a commercial feed manufacturer on San Fernando Road. Taylor raised oats, barley, hogs, and pigeons on the riverfront land (The River Project 2016).
Most of the homes in the Taylor Yard area were not constructed until the housing boom of the 1920s. The banks of the Los Angeles River were encased in concrete in the late 1930s.
In 1923, because of congestion at River Station (currently Los Angeles State Historic Park), the service and maintenance functions for the Union Pacific Railroad were moved to Taylor Yard. Taylor Yard had been named after J. Hartley Taylor, who was a grain merchant and owned a milling company in the area (California Department of Parks and Recreation 2016).
Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, the property was a rail yard and an industrial site, used primarily as a freight switching facility, storage space, and maintenance and repair facility for rail cars and locomotive engines. Several utility shops were on the property, which provided electrical, plumbing, and mechanical support services. Shortly after World War I, the Southern Pacific Railroad outgrew
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-7 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 4
its Midway Yard facility and moved to what is now Rio de Los Angeles State Park. Operations at the railroad complex slowed in the 1960s when rail facilities opened elsewhere (California Department of Parks and Recreation 2016).
In the 1960s, a 247-acre freight switching facility called Taylor Yard began to slow down its operations during a time when Los Angeles was growing and expanding rapidly (California Department of Parks and Recreation 2016). By 1985, it was practically closed, used only for maintenance and storage. These parcels of land remained undeveloped along the channelized Los Angeles River. Portions of the river near the project area are still soft bottomed, or partially un- cemented, allowing for an opportunity to reestablish natural processes within the emerging Los Angeles River Greenway. It is one of the last remaining undeveloped portions of land along the river (California Department of Parks and Recreation 2016).
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 4-8 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 5 Sources Consulted
5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search A records search for the proposed project was conducted at the South Central Coastal Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System on February 16, 2016, by ICF archaeologist Katherine Crosmer. The search included a review of the following:
l National Register of Historic Places
l California Register of Historical Resources
l California Inventory of Historic Resources
l California Historical Landmarks
l California Points of Historical Interest
The results of the records search show that 11 cultural resources, all represented by historic architectural features, exist in the 0.5-mile study area buffer. Table 1 contains a complete list of all resources within the 0.5-mile study area buffer. No archaeological resources have been previously recorded within 0.5 mile of the project footprint.
Table 1. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 0.5 Mile of the Project Footprint
Site No. In Project Area Name/Location 19-190897 Yes Los Angeles River Channel, Glendale Narrow Section 19-188007 No San Fernando Road 19-170800 No 2649 Arvia St. (Private) 2664 Alice St. – No (2664–2666 Alice St.) – 2668 Alice St. No (26681/2 Alice St.) – No 2358 Birkdale St. – No 1142 Cypress Ave. – No 1150 Cypress Ave. 19-170816 No 2816 Future St. – No 1545 N. San Fernando Rd. – No 2331 Riverdale Ave.
The results of the records search also show that 14 cultural resource studies have been conducted within the proposed project’s 0.5-mile study area buffer. None of these studies have been conducted within the project area. Table 2 contains a complete list of previous cultural resource studies in the project’s 0.5-mile study area buffer.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 5-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 5
Table 2. Previous Cultural Resources Studies within 0.5 Mile of the Project Footprint
Report No. Date Title Author LA-02950 1992 Consolidated Report: Cultural Resource Studies for L. W. Reed the Proposed Pacific Pipeline Project LA-08225 2001 Phase I Archaeological Survey for the Altamira Mary K. Maki Canyon Drainage Control Project City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles County, California LA-10638 2010 Preliminary Historical/Archaeological Resources Bai “Tom” Tang Study Southern California Regional Rail Authority River Subdivision Positive Train Control Project, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California LA-10642 2010 Preliminary Historical/Archaeological Resources Bai “Tom” Tang Study, Antelope Valley Line Positive Train Control Project, Southern California Rail Authority Lancaster to Glendale, Los Angeles County, California LA-12526 2013 Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Chloride C. Ehringer TMDL Facilities Plan Project, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment LA-02517 1991 A Phase I Archaeological Study for Eight Areas Robert J. Wlodarski Proposed from the New Los Angeles Police Training Academy, and Driver Training Facility, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California LA-02683 1992 Police Bond Program-Police Driver Training – Facility LA-05449 2000 Phase I Cultural Resource Investigation at Lennar – Taylor Yard LA-06837 2003 Cultural Resources Monitoring: Northeast Roberta S. Greenwood Interceptor Sewer Project LA-08054 2006 Results of a Phase I Cultural Resource Jeanette A. McKenna investigation for the Proposed Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Taylor Yard Park Water Recycling Project, Located in the Glendale and Glassell Park Areas of Los Angeles County, California LA-08257 2007 A Phase I Archaeological Study for the 1427 Fourth Robert J. Wlodarski Street EIR, City of Santa Monica, County of Los Angeles, California LA-09419 2008 Archaeological Inventory for Fire Station 44, John M. Foster Apparatus Storage Facility LA-09604 2008 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Wayne H. Bonner Results for T-Mobile USA Candidate SV11766A (Ventvue Windows 02), 2425 Glover Place, Los Angeles County, California LA-12515 2012 Verizon Cellular Communications Tower Site- – Future, 1600 North San Fernando Road (AIN: 5442-005-010), Los Angeles, CA 90065
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 5-2 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 5
5.2 Native American Consultation A request for a check of the Sacred Lands File was made to the California NAHC on February 24, 2016. A response from the NAHC was received on March 9, 2016. The results of the check of the Sacred Lands File proved negative. The NAHC also provided a list of Native American consultants for the project area. The City of Los Angeles contacted the individuals on the provided list as part of Assembly Bill (AB) 52. Letters regarding the proposed project were sent to Native American individuals or contacts for Los Angeles County on May 10, 2016 (Table 3).
Table 3. Native American Contacts Contacted for This Project
Native American Contact Affiliation Rudy Ortega, Jr., President Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians Andrew Salas, Chairperson Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians—Kizh Nation Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resources Director Gabrielino/Tongva Nation Anthony Morales, Chairperson Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Linda Candelaria, Co-Chairperson Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe John Valenzuela, Chairperson San Fernando Band of Mission Indians Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Director Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
5.3 Paleontological Records Search A fossil localities search was requested from the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC), for the project area. The NHMLAC responded on March 14, 2016, saying that it had no recorded fossil localities in the project footprint or the surrounding area. Based on this locality records search, no paleontological resources are known to be present in the project footprint.
Sediments similar to those in the project area have yielded fossils in locations 2 to 3 miles to the south. In the first of these localities, LACM 1023, fossil specimens of turkey, sabre-toothed cat, horse, and deer were found at an unknown depth. At LACM 2032, fossils of sloth, mastodon, mammoth, horse, camel, and pond turtle were found at a depth of 20 to 35 feet, in older Quaternary alluvium. This older alluvium was capped by younger deposits.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 5-3 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 6 Field Methods
The north side of the Los Angeles River, the area for the proposed bridge abutment, and adjacent areas were examined on January 21, 2016, by ICF archaeologist Stephen Bryne. As noted in Section 4.1.3, Geology and Soils, the top of the bank is composed of artificial fill material. Immediately north of the proposed bridge abutment is the former Taylor Yard, currently consisting of an abandoned rail line and yard, Kerr Road, and Metrolink rail lines. Areas of exposed ground were examined for evidence of cultural resources, such as artifacts or ecofacts; however, no evidence was observed.
The south side of the Los Angeles River, the area for the proposed bridge abutment, was examined on February 3, 2016, by ICF archaeologist Stephen Bryne. From the top of the Los Angeles River channel slope, the south side of the river is composed of the Los Angeles River Greenway Trail (see Figure 3). This trail is paved, and there are no areas of exposed ground. As such, the ground surface in this area could not be observed. However, this area is the current top of the channelized portion of the Los Angeles River. This area would have been subjected to grading, cutting, and filling during channelization of the river.
No archaeological resources were identified during the field survey. As a result, there is a low likelihood of encountering archaeological resources during construction activities.
The ground surface of the project area consists of artificial fill, built features, or recent and disturbed Holocene alluvium. There are no exposures of subsurface sedimentary units or bedrock; therefore, a paleontological survey was not conducted for the project.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 6-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 7 Results and Recommendations
7.1 Archaeological Resources The records search, Sacred Lands File search, and field survey provided negative results for any archaeological resources within the footprint of the proposed project. The proposed project area consists of the former Taylor Yard rail yard and the channelized portion of the Los Angeles River. As such, the entire proposed project area has been previously disturbed by construction. No known archaeological resources occur within the project footprint. As a result, there is a low likelihood of encountering buried cultural resources within the project area.
In the unlikely event that cultural materials (Native American or historic artifacts) are encountered during construction, work should stop in the vicinity of the find until a qualified archaeologist can assess the material. Design of a treatment plan and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer may be required to appropriately mitigate any unanticipated discoveries. Treatment measures typically include development of avoidance strategies, capping with fill material, or mitigation of impacts through data recovery programs, such as excavation or detailed documentation, or other mitigation measures, following standard archaeological procedures. If human remains are exposed during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. Construction must halt in the area of the discovery of human remains, the area must be protected, and consultation and treatment should occur as prescribed by law. No further archaeological resource management is required beyond the measures specified above for the proposed project.
7.2 Paleontological Resources The results of the paleontological records search determined that no paleontological resources have been recorded in the footprint of the proposed project. Ground disturbances associated with the project will be mostly shallow in nature and, based on geological maps and materials analyzed, unlikely to encounter paleontological resources.
Excavation for the piles and the center pier, however, could encounter fossil resources at depths greater than 5 to 10 feet. However, given the depths of deposits in the river channel and the small footprint of these excavations, there is a low likelihood of encountering paleontological resources during construction activities.
If fossil materials are discovered during construction, all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area should be diverted until a qualified paleontologist can evaluate the find and make recommendations. If the qualified paleontologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant paleontological resource, additional investigations, possibly including fossil recovery, identification, preparation, curation, and reporting, may be required to mitigate adverse impacts from project implementation. Construction shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented or the materials are determined to not require further investigation.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 7-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
Chapter 8 References Cited
Bean, L. J., and C. R. Smith. 1978. Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California, R. F. Heizer (ed.), pp. 538–549. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Byrd, Brian F., and L. Mark Raab. 2007. Prehistory of the Southern Bight: Models for a New Millennium. In California Prehistory, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 215–227. Altamira Press, Lanham, Maryland.
City of Los Angeles. 2015. Geotechnical Engineering Report Taylor Yard Bikeway/Pedestrian Bridge over the Los Angeles River. City of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering Group.
Dibblee, Thomas W. Jr. 1989. Geologic Map of the Los Angeles Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, #DF-22.
Dillon, B. D. 1994. Alameda District Plan, Los Angeles, California: Prehistoric and Early Historic Archaeological Research. On file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University–Fullerton.
Erlandson, J. M., and R. H. Colten. 1991. An Archaeological Context for Early Holocene Studies on the California Coast. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. H. Colten, pp. 1–10. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California– Los Angeles.
Fagan, B. M. 2003. Before California. Altamira Press, New York.
Gumbrecht, Blake. 2001. The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death and Possible Rebirth. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
Kroeber, A. L. 1925. Handbooks of the Indians of California. California Book Company, Berkeley, California.
McCawley, William. 1996. The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum Press, Banning, California and Ballena Press, Novato, California.
McLeod, Samuel 2016. Letter report: Paleontological Resources for the Proposed Taylor Yard Pedestrian Bridge Project, in the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County project area. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Vertebrate Paleontology Section. Prepared for ICF, 14 March 2016.
Miller, Bruce W. 1991. The Gabrielino. Sand River Press, Los Osos, California.
Moratto, M. J. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.
Morrison, Pat, and Mark Lamonica. 2001. Rio LA. Angel City Press, Santa Monica, California.
State of California Department of Parks and Recreation. 2016. Rio de Los Angeles State Park State Recreation Area. Available: http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=22277. Accessed: August 2016.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 8-1 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16
City of Los Angeles Chapter 8
The River Project. 2016. Taylor Yard Rio de Los Angeles State Park. Available: http://www.theriverproject.org/projects/taylor-yard-rio-de-los-angeles-state-park. Accessed: August 2016.
Wallace, W. J. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 25–36. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8. W. C. Sturtevant, General Editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Archaeological Survey Report and Paleontological Assessment September 2016 8-2 Taylor Yard Bikeway and Pedestrian Bridge ICF 00006.16