Archaeological and Paleontological Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF VAN BUREN BLVD AND RUTILE STREET, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: CONTROL MANAGEMENT, INC. Alex Flores P.O. Box 7398 LaVerne, CA 91750 Prepared by: CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. Ted Roberts, MA, RPA Kyle Knabb, PhD, RPA Lauren DeOliveira 5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 750 Santa Ana, California 92707 (949) 261-5414 December 5, 2018 This page intentionally left blank NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE INFORMATION Authors: Ted Roberts, Kyle Knabb, and Lauren DeOliveira Firm: Chambers Group, Inc. Client/Project Proponent: Control Management, Inc. Report Date: December 5, 2018 Report Title: Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment Report for a Commercial Development on the Southeast Corner of Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street, Riverside County, California Type of Study: Cultural and Paleontological Resources Survey New Sites: N/A Updated Sites: None USGS Quad: Fontana 7.5-minute quadrangle Acreage: 16.22 Permit Numbers: N/A Key Words: County of Riverside, City of Jurupa Valley, Archaeological Survey, Negative Results, Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street. This page intentionally left blank Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment Report for a Commercial Development on the corner of Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street Jurupa Valley, Riverside County, California TABLE OF CONTENTS Page NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE INFORMATION .................................................................. IV SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ............................................................ 1 SECTION 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ........................................................................ 3 2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 3 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION ...................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 3.0 – SOURCES CONSULTED .................................................................................................. 4 3.1 REPORTS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ............................................................................................. 4 3.2 PREVIOUSLY RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ............................... 6 3.3 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION AND AB 52 CONSULTATION.................................. 7 3.4 PALEONTOLGICAL RECORD SEARCH ............................................................................................. 7 SECTION 4.0 – BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 8 4.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING ...................................................................................................................... 8 4.2 PALEONTOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................ 8 4.3 GABRIELENO AND SERRANO CULTURE HISTORY .......................................................................... 9 4.3.1 Gabrieleno Archaeology and Ethnography ...................................................................... 9 4.3.2 Serrano Archaeology and Ethnography ......................................................................... 10 4.4 PREHISTORY ................................................................................................................................ 10 4.5 HISTORY ...................................................................................................................................... 12 SECTION 5.0 – FIELD METHODS ......................................................................................................... 13 SECTION 6.0 – RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 14 SECTION 7.0 – FIGURES .................................................................................................................... 15 SECTION 8.0 – REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 20 Chambers Group, Inc. i 21128 Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment Report for a Commercial Development on the corner of Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street Jurupa Valley, Riverside County, California APPENDICES APPENDIX A Confidential Records Search Results APPENDIX B Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Land File Results APPENDIC C Natural History Museum of Los Angeles Paleontology Record Search Results LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1: Previous Cultural Resources Studies within the Study Area ........................................................... 4 Table 2: Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within the Study Area ..................................................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location Map ................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 2: Geologic Sensitivity Map .............................................................................................................. 17 Figure 3: Overview of APE. Looking Southeast. .......................................................................................... 18 Figure 4: Union Pacific Railroad freight train passing by the APE. .............................................................. 18 Figure 5: Overview of APE. Looking west and showing trail used by equestrians (right) and recent refuse debris piles (background left). .................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 6: Overview of APE looking west. .................................................................................................... 19 Chambers Group, Inc. ii 21128 Archaeological and Paleontological Assessment Report for a Commercial Development on the corner of Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street Jurupa Valley, Riverside County, California SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group) has been contracted by Control Management, Inc., within the City of Jurupa Valley, Riverside County, California, to complete an Archaeological and Paleontological Literature Review and site survey for the proposed commercial development. The proposed project includes the construction of a convenience store, service station, car wash, commercial building, restaurant building and parking lot. The project is proposed on an existing 16.22-acre property located in on the southeast corner of Van Buren Blvd and Rutile Street, Jurupa Valley, Riverside County. Chambers Group completed an Archaeological and Paleontological Literature Review and site survey of the 16.22-acre project location. This report outlines the Archaeological and Paleontological findings. The following study has been conducted in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This report includes appropriate mitigation measures to ensure less than significant impacts to inadvertent findings of cultural resources during construction. 1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK Work for this project was conducted in compliance with CEQA. The regulatory framework as it pertains to cultural resources under CEQA has been detailed below. Under the provisions of CEQA, including the CEQA Statutes (Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 21083.2 and 21084.1), the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR], § 15064.5), and PRC § 5024.1 (Title 14 CCR § 4850 et seq.), properties expected to be directly or indirectly affected by a proposed project must be evaluated for CRHR eligibility (PRC § 5024.1). The purpose of the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is to maintain listings of the state’s historical resources and to indicate which properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from material impairment and substantial adverse change. The term historical resources includes a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR; a resource included in a local register of historical resources; and any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (CCR § 15064.5[a]). The criteria for listing properties in the CRHR were expressly developed in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP 1995:2) regards “any physical evidence of human activities over 45 years old” as meriting recordation and evaluation. 1.1.1 CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES A cultural resource is considered “historically significant” under CEQA if the resource meets one or more of the criteria for listing on the CRHR. The CRHR was designed to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify existing cultural resources within the state and to indicate which of those resources should be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change. The following criteria have been established for the CRHR. A resource is considered significant if