From: Lynne Birkinbine To: Dave Koss; Lofgreen, Jessica Date: 12/17/2010 4:14 PM Subject: Final Phase II for Earl Scheib
Jessica and Dave-
Our office has reviewed the final Phase II ESA report prepared by Terracon for the Earl Scheib Auto Paint site at 1555 E. 22nd Street. We concur with the findings of the report. This property has been adequately characterized. No further action is warranted at this time.
Please advise the contractor before construction to be vigilant when any suspicious odors, discolored soil, or metal debris are encountered during excavation activities, and to contact the city PM if necessary. If an unknown UST is uncovered, all construction activities must cease, and the TFD must be contacted immediately for field inspection.
A hard copy of the final report has been sent via interoffice mail.
- Lynne
Lynne Birkinbine Environmental Manager City of Tucson Environmental Services 520-837-3708 direct 520-791-3175 central office 520-791-4155 fax
EMAIL:[email protected]
A Class III Cultural Resource Survey for the Proposed Road Improvements along 22nd Street from Park Avenue to Tucson Boulevard, and along Kino Parkway from Silverlake Road to Warehouse Avenue, in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona
Prepared by: Jeffrey T. Jones
City of Tucson Project No. 09-45 Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 ASM Accession No. 2009-832 May 24, 2011 A Class III Cultural Resource Survey for the Proposed Road Improvements along 22nd Street from Park Avenue to Tucson Boulevard, and along Kino Parkway from Silverlake Road to Warehouse Avenue, in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona
Prepared by: Jeffrey T. Jones
Submitted to: Jonathan Mabry, Historic Preservation Officer City of Tucson Department of Urban Planning and Design 149 North Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
Submitted by: Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd. 1575 East River Road, Suite 201 Tucson, Arizona 85718
City of Tucson Project No. 09-45 Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 ASM Accession No. 2009-832 May 24, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ...... iii
Introduction ...... 1 Project Area ...... 1 Previous Research ...... 15 Cultural History ...... 21 Paleoindian and Early Archaic Periods (11,000–6000 B.C.) ...... 21 Middle Archaic Period (6000–2100 B.C.) ...... 22 Late Archaic–Early Agricultural Period (2100 B.C.–A.D. 150) ...... 22 Early Ceramic Period (A.D. 150–650) ...... 23 Pioneer Period (A.D. 650–750) ...... 24 Colonial Period (A.D. 750–950) ...... 24 Sedentary Period (A.D. 950–1150)...... 25 Classic Period (A.D. 1150–1450)...... 26 Protohistoric Period (A.D. 1450–1540) ...... 27 Historic Period (A.D. 1540–1950) ...... 29 Survey Methods ...... 30 Evaluation Criteria ...... 30 Survey Results ...... 31 2009 Survey Results ...... 31 2011 Survey Results ...... 32 Management Recommendations ...... 32 References ...... 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project location...... 2 Figure 2. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway...... 4 Figure 3. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway...... 5 Figure 4. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway...... 6 Figure 5. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, east of Barraza-Aviation Parkway...... 7 Figure 6. Map of previously recorded sites within 1 mile of the current survey area...... 16 Figure 7. Map of previous surveys within 1 mile of the current survey area...... 20 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Properties in the Area of Potential Effect, West of Barraza-Aviation Parkway...... 8 Table 2. Properties in the Area of Potential Effect, East of Barraza-Aviation Parkway ...... 12 Table 3. Previously Recorded Sites within 1 Mile of the Current Survey Area ...... 15 Table 4. Previous Surveys within 1 Mile of the Current Survey Area ...... 17
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 ii
ABSTRACT
PROJECT TITLE: A Class III Cultural Resource Survey for the Proposed Road Improvements along 22nd Street from Park Avenue to Tucson Boulevard ,and along Kino Parkway from Silverlake Road to Warehouse Avenue, in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona
LAND STATUS: City of Tucson and private
FUNDING SOURCE: Regional Transportation Authority
AGENCY: City of Tucson
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A systematic, non-collection, 100-percent pedestrian survey of a 97.11-acre area proposed for the widening of 22nd Street and Kino Parkway.
CITY OF TUCSON PROJECT NO.: 09-45
TIERRA PROJECT NO.: 9T6-026
TIERRA REPORT NO.: 2009-83
ASM ACCESSION NO.: 2009-832
PERMIT NO.: Arizona Antiquities Act Blanket Permit No. 2009-014bl
FIELD WORK DATES: November 25 and December 7, 2009; March 18, April 12 and 21, and May 16, 2011
PROJECT LOCATION: The project area is located along both sides of 22nd Street between South Park Avenue and Tucson Boulevard; along both sides of Kino Parkway between Silverlake Road and East Warehouse Avenue; along both sides of South Warren Avenue between East 22nd Street and East 21st Street; along South Curtis Avenue between East 20th Street and East 22nd Street; along South Vine Avenue between East Warehouse Avenue and East 22nd Street; along both sides of South Cherry Avenue between 22nd Street and midway between East 24th Street and East 25th Street; along East 23rd Street between South Cherrybell Stravenue and South Neff Street; and along portions of East Fairland Stravenue, South Campbell Avenue, East Willits Way, and East Silverlake Road in the S ½ of Section 17, the S ½ of Section 18, the N ½ of Section 19, and the N ½ of Section 20, Township 14 South, Range 14 East, Gila and Salt River Baseline and Meridian (G&SRB&M), on the Tucson, Arizona (1995), 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey quadrangle in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 iii
NO. OF ACRES SURVEYED: 98 acres (39.66 ha)
NO. OF SITES: 0
NO. OF ISOLATED OCCURRENCES: 0
MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: No prehistoric archaeological sites or isolated occurrences were identified during this survey. However, many of the structures in the project area are themselves historic in age, dating between 1947 and 1964. Tierra recommends that a Historic Properties Assessment be conducted by qualified architectural historians to study and record the historic architecture and other historic cultural features located within the project area, to evaluate these properties as to their eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the State Register of Cultural Properties, and to minimize the impact of the project on these historic cultural resources.
The client and all subcontractors are reminded that, in accordance with Section 41-844 of the Arizona Revised Statues (ARS §41-844), the person supervising any survey, excavation, construction, or like activity on lands administered by the State of Arizona or any of its administrative subdivisions (i.e., counties or municipalities) is required, upon incidentally encountering cultural deposits more than 50 years old or human remains, to halt all work on the undertaking and immediately notify the Director of the Arizona State Museum on the finding, so that a consultation process can be initiated and an appropriate course of treatment decided upon. Work in the area is not to resume until authorization is received from the Director.
The client and all subcontractors also are reminded that, in accordance with ARS §41-865, should buried human remains or funerary goods be encountered incidentally on private lands during any ground-disturbing activities associated with the current project or any follow-up work done at any time in the future, all such work must immediately be halted in the vicinity of the finding and the Director of the Arizona State Museum must immediately be informed, so that a consultation process can be initiated and an appropriate course of treatment decided upon. Under the statute the Director must make an initial response to such a notification within ten working days; there is, however, no specified limit on the length of time that work may be delayed in order to deal with the finding in an appropriate manner. In any case, work is not to resume until authorization is received from the museum director. Should the Director fail to respond to the notification within the 10-day window
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 iv
provided in the statute, it can be assumed that authorization to resume work has been given.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 v
INTRODUCTION On November 25 and December 7, 2009, archaeologists Jeffrey T. Jones (Field Director) and April Whitaker of Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd. (Tierra), performed a Class III archaeological survey of a 97.11-acre area along both sides of 22nd Street between South Fremont Avenue and Tucson Boulevard and along Kino Parkway between East Warehouse Avenue and South 28th Street (Figure 1). On March 18 and 22, and April 12 and 21, 2011, archaeologist Jones conducted an inspection of portions of twelve additional parcels within this area. On May 16, 2011, archaeologist Joseph Howell surveyed an additional area along both sides of Silverlake Road between Cherry Avenue and Cherybell Stravenue. The fieldwork was done at the request of the City of Tucson (City of Tucson Job No. 09-45) to identify, record, and evaluate cultural resources within the area that might be adversely affected by the proposed improvements to 22nd Street. Work was done under Arizona Antiquities Act Blanket Permit Nos. 2009-14bl and 2011-08bl, issued by the Arizona State Museum (ASM) and required 2.5 field-person days. PROJECT AREA The project area is located along both sides of 22nd Street between South Park Avenue and Tucson Blvd., along both sides of Kino Parkway between Silverlake Road and East Warehouse Avenue; along both sides of South Warren Avenue between East 22nd Street and East 21st Street; along South Curtis Avenue between East 20th Street and East 22nd Street; along South Vine Avenue between East Warehouse Avenue and East 22nd Street; along both sides of South Cherry Avenue between 22nd Street and midway between East 24th Street and East 25th Street; along East 23rd Street between S Cherrybell Stravenue and South Neff Street; along portions of East Fairland Stravenue, South Campbell Avenue, East Willits Way, and East Silverlake Road; and along Silverlake Road between Cherry Avenue and Cherrybell Stavenue (Figures 2–5) in the S½ of the S½ of Section 17, the S ½ of Section 18, the N½ of Section 19, and the N½ of the N ½ of Section 20, Township 14 South, Range 14 East, Gila and Salt River Baseline and Meridian (G&SRB&M), on the Tucson, Arizona (1995), 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona (see Figure 1). Average elevation is 2,450 feet above mean sea level.
The area of potential effect (APE) west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway consists of 2 residential properties, 15 commercial properties, 9 vacant properties, portions of 5 parcels owned by the U.S. Government, 3 parcels owned by the Union Pacific Rail Road, 1 parcel owned by the Arizona Board of Regents, and 58 parcels listed as City of Tucson Department of Transportation (TDOT) rights- of-way (ROWs) (see Figures 2–4; Table 1). The two residential properties were constructed in 1949 and 1953, and one of the commercial properties was constructed in 1955. A second commercial property was constructed in 1964 so will be historic by the projected 2014 construction date. The remaining commercial properties date between 1969 and 1990. The 1949 residential structure was demolished sometime in the past and the only historic properties remaining are the 1953, 1955, and 1964 structures.
The TDOT parcels include all of South Kino Parkway, East 22nd Street, South Cherrybell Stravenue, Silverlake Road, and a number of smaller streets, as well as undeveloped areas currently used for materials storage, a large flood control retention basin west of South Kino Parkway, and several vacant lots.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 1
Figure 1. Project location.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 2
The APE east of Barraza-Aviation Parkway includes 17 residential properties, 13 commercial properties, and 8 vacant properties (Figure 5; Table 2). In general, the residential properties contain brick Tucson Ranch style structures associated with the Country Club Manor and Parkway Terrace developments. They range in construction dates from 1947 to 1961. A residential structure built in 1953 is now listed as a commercial property (see Table 2). Other commercial properties include a 1948 shopping center and associated parking lots and four modern businesses dating from 1969 to 1998.
The parcels inspected during March 2011 include three asphalt-covered parking lots (Pima County Assessor’s parcels 129080470, 129080490, and 12910097A) south of the East 23rd Street alignment and east of South Cherrybell Stravenue, a right-of-way along the southwestern edge of a vacant lot east of south Campbell Avenue and north of East Fairland Stravenue along the west side of Pima County Assessor’s parcel 13001002b, and an approximately 10 by 50 foot temporary construction easement south of Neff Street and 23rd Street in Pima County Assessor’s parcel 129080460, all owned by the U.S. Government and currently in use (see Figure 2). Also inspected was an approximately 10 by 560 foot temporary construction easement that extends northwestward from 22nd street and the now abandoned Campbell Avenue right-of-way along the northern portions of Pima County Assessor’s parcel 129080270 and the southern portion of Pima County Assessor’s parcel 12908022A, both owned by the Union Pacific Rail Road, and an approximately 50 by 263 foot right-of-way along the northern portion of Pima County Assessor’s parcel 129080040 owned by the Arizona Board of Regents (see Figure 3).
Two parcels were inspected on April 12, 2011. The first was a privately-owned, 11.51-foot-wide linear area that extended from Highland Avenue 190.48 feet eastward immediately north of the 22nd Street right-of-way (see Figure 3). The second was an approximately 20-foot-by-20-foot extension of an existing access to the Union Pacific Railroad’s Tucson Train Yard. The extension is on Railroad property.
Two parcels were inspected on April 21, 2011. The first was a privately-owned linear area, approximately 8 feet wide, that extended from Park Avenue 790 feet eastward immediately south of the 22nd Street right-of-way (see Figure 3). The second was a 24-foot-wide right-of-way that extended from the center of Fairland Stravenue southwestward approximately 380 feet, including portions of the existing Silverlake Road right-of-way.
The parcel that was surveyed on May 16, 2011, consisted of a 90–95-foot-wide linear area centered approximately on Silverlake Road, beginning at a point approximately 100 feet west of Cherry Avenue and ending at a point approximately 100 feet southwest of Cherrybell Stravenue.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 3
Figure 2. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 4
Figure 3. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 5
Figure 4. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, west of Barraza-Aviation Parkway.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 6
Figure 5. Map of properties in the area of potential effect, east of Barraza-Aviation Parkway.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 7
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Table 1. Properties in the Area of Potential Effect, West of Barraza-Aviation Parkway Property ID No. Address Assessor Parcel No. (APN) Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) 0 124-18-1950 commercial not given MSA #77 Telecommunications tower 1 124-18-1890 ROW n/a TDOT 2 124-18-1900 ROW 1976 TDOT 3 124-18-1910 ROW n/a TDOT 4 124-18-218A ROW n/a TDOT 1007 S Curtis Avenue 5 124-18-2130 ROW n/a TDOT 6 124-18-2120 ROW n/a TDOT 7 124-18-2190 ROW n/a TDOT 1022 S. Vine Ave. 8 124-18-2200 ROW n/a TDOT 9 124-18-2220 ROW n/a TDOT 1021 S. Curtis Avenue 10 124-18-2230 ROW n/a TDOT 11 124-18-225A ROW n/a TDOT 12 124-18-2240 ROW n/a TDOT 1050 S. Vine Avenue 13 124-18-2870 ROW n/a TDOT 14 124-18-2860 ROW n/a TDOT 15 124-18-2850 ROW n/a TDOT 16 124-18-2840 ROW n/a TDOT 17 124-18-2830 ROW n/a TDOT 1440 E. 21st Street 18 124-18-2820 ROW n/a TDOT 1415 E. 21st Street 19 124-18-2280 ROW n/a TDOT 20 124-18-2890 ROW n/a TDOT 21 124-18-2910 ROW n/a TDOT 22 124-18-2900 ROW n/a TDOT Dimitrios George 23 124-18-2430 residential 1953 1123 S. Vine Avenue and Maria Sklias 8
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Property ID No. Address Assessor Parcel No. (APN) Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) 24 124-18-2810 residential 1949 Freddie L. Williams demolished 25 124-18-2920 ROW n/a TDOT 26 124-18-2930 ROW n/a TDOT 27 124-18-2940 ROW n/a TDOT 28 124-18-2950 ROW n/a TDOT 29 124-18-2960 ROW n/a TDOT 1429 E. 22nd Street 30 124-18-2970 ROW n/a TDOT 31 124-18-307A vacant lot n/a George D. Sklias 32 124-18-308A vacant lot n/a George D. Sklias 33 124-18-309A vacant lot n/a George D. Sklias 1515 E. 22nd Street 34 124-18-3100 vacant lot n/a Leon and Lois Thikoll commercial parking Earl Scheib Realty 35 124-18-3110 1969 1555 E. 22nd Street lot Corp. commercial auto Earl Scheib Realty 36 124-18-3120 1969 1555 E. 22nd Street painting Corp. Nepenthe Associates 37 129-08-025B commercial 1985 and Mark and Denise 1601 E. 22nd Street Ross McGilvray, Brian P. 38 129-08-007B commercial 1979 1625 E 22nd Street and Teresa Uribe 39 129-08-0050 commercial 1974 Walsh Bros. 1665 E. 22nd Street 40 129-08-0010 vacant lot n/a Walsh Bros. 1695 E. 22nd Street Paul B. and Lynn T. 41 129-08-002A commercial 1979 1697 E. 21st Street Hoffman Arizona Board of 42 129-08-0040 vacant lot n/a 1715 E. 22nd Street Regents 43 129-08-0270 commercial n/a Union Pacific Hameed, Hossein 44 124-17-112A commercial 1986 Ghanim and Saieed 1001 E. 22nd Street Walla 9
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Property ID No. Address Assessor Parcel No. (APN) Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) 45 124-17-115A commercial 1990 MKZ Enterprises 1134/1138 S. Santa Rita 46 124-17-1170 commercial 1990 MKZ Enterprises Avenue 47 129-11-0630 ROW n/a TDOT 1248 E. 22nd Street 48 129-10-0330 ROW n/a TDOT 1328 E. 22nd Street 49 129-10-0020 ROW n/a TDOT 1538 E. 22nd Street 1616 E. 22nd Street, 50 129-08-021G vacant lot n/a Decagee II LLC 1219/1239 S. Cherry Avenue Michael J. and 51 129-08-020F commercial 1964 1706/1708 E. 22nd Street Susanne R. Wilson commercial 52 129-08-0280 1955 S. Campbell LLC 1850 E. 22nd Street convenience market 53 129-11-0620 ROW n/a TDOT 54 129-10-0130 ROW n/a TDOT 1250 S. Cherry Ave. 55 129-10-070A ROW n/a TDOT 56 129-10-0860 ROW n/a TDOT 1518 E. 23rd Street. 57 129-10-0980 ROW n/a TDOT 58 129-10-112A ROW n/a TDOT 1406 S. Curtis Avenue 59 129-10-1160 ROW n/a TDOT 60 129-08-0610 ROW n/a TDOT 61 129-08-0620 ROW n/a TDOT 62 129-08-0500 ROW n/a TDOT 1404 S. Cherry Avenue 63 129-08-0510 ROW n/a TDOT 64 129-08-0520 ROW n/a TDOT 65 129-08-0530 ROW n/a TDOT 66 129-08-054A ROW n/a TDOT 1425 S. Cherry Avenue 67 129-09-0440 ROW n/a TDOT
10 68 129-09-0460 ROW n/a TDOT
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Property ID No. Address Assessor Parcel No. (APN) Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) 69 129-09-0460 ROW n/a TDOT 70 129-09-070 ROW n/a TDOT 71 129-09-0480 ROW n/a TDOT 72 129-09-0490 ROW n/a TDOT 73 129-09-0500 ROW n/a TDOT 74 129-09-0510 ROW n/a TDOT 75 129-09-0380 ROW n/a TDOT 76 129-09-0390 ROW n/a TDOT 77 129-09-0370 ROW n/a TDOT 78 129-09-0360 ROW n/a TDOT 1507 E. 22nd Street 79 129-09-002A commercial 1969 Sheppard LLC 1721 S. Cherrybell Stravanue 80 130-01-003A commercial 1969 Sheppard LLC 1721 S. Cherrybell Stravanue 81 124-18-276B n/a MYT Partners 82 124-18-277A n/a MYT Partners 83 124-18-278A n/a MYT Partners 84 124-18-279A n/a MYT Partners 85 130-01-001A n/a Union Pacific Railroad 129-11-001J ROW n/a Ronco 129-11-001K ROW n/a Ronco
Note: Bolded parcels are historic in age. 11
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Table 2. Properties in the Area of Potential Effect, East of Barraza-Aviation Parkway Property ID No. Assessor Parcel Address Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) No. (APN) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) 1 129-01-1250 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson 1155 S. Norris Avenue Antonio Gonzalez and Francisco and Josefa Gonzalez, commercial auto 2 129-01-129C 1969 Trustees of the Francisco and 1150 S. Plumer Avenue repair Josefa Gonzalez Trust dated March 10, 1997 commercial auto Richard J. and Alice L. 3 129-06-4120 1986 2201 E. 22nd Street repair Martinetti commercial auto Richard J. and Alice L. 4 129-06-4130 1981 2201 E. 22nd Street repair Martinetti commercial auto Richard J. and Alice L. 5 129-06-4140 1986 2215 E. 22nd Street repair Martinetti commercial business Richard J. and Alice L. 6 129-06-4150 1986 2219 E. 22nd Street and billboard Martinetti 7 129-06-4160 residential 1950 Alfred T. Diaz 2225 E. 22nd Street Mercedes A. Montoya and 8 129-06-4170 residential 1950 2231 E. 22nd Street Yolanda Faber 9 129-06-4180 residential 1961 Rose E. Fass 2237 E. 22nd Street 10 129-06-4190 residential 1953 Heracleo A. Lopez 2245 E. 22nd Street 11 129-06-4280 residential 1950 Wilma Archuleta 2303 E. 22nd Street 12 129-06-4290 residential 1950 Lupita Mitz 2309 E. 22nd Street unoccupied Rudolph C. and Estella A. 13 129-06-4300 1956 2315 E. 22nd Street residential Arenas Vincent T., III, Shawn and 14 129-06-4310 residential 1952 2323 E. 22nd Street Ambrosia Pedersoli Armando S., Jr.; Richard S.; 15 129-06-4320 residential 1950 2329 E. 22nd Street and David M. Quiroz 16 129-06-4330 residential 1958 Regina M. Chamberlain 2335 E. 22nd Street Christopher John Perez, Trustee of the Christopher 17 129-06-4340 residential 1950 2343 E. 22nd Street John Perez Trust dated October 20, 1995 12 12
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Property ID No. Assessor Parcel Address Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) No. (APN) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) Cielo Rentals Limited 18 129-06-4350 residential 1950 Partnership, LLLP (Barbara 2349 E. 22nd Street Ann Gruber) 19 129-06-4410 business 1953 M. Anthony Cooper 2403 E. 22nd Street Edward C. and Mercy C. 20 129-06-4420 residential 1953 2409 E. 22nd Street Lopez 21 130-04-0040 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson 2224 E. 22nd Street 22 130-04-0050 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson none given 23 130-04-0060 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson none given 24 130-04-0070 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson none given 25 130-04-0080 vacant lot n/a City of Tucson none given Pythagoras, LLC (Charles and 26 130-04-012A commercial 1969 2302 E. 22nd Street Mary Soulliard) commercial business Pythagoras, LLC (Charles and 27 130-04-0140 1969 none given parking lot Mary Soulliard) commercial business Pythagoras, LLC (Charles and 28 130-04-0150 1969 none given parking lot Mary Soulliard) unoccupied 29 130-04-0160 1950 Valerie J. Cruz 2326 E. 22nd Street residential City of Tucson – Acquired via advanced acquisition 30 130-04-0170 residential 1953 from American Home 2332 E. 22nd Street Mortgage Corp. f/k/a Lucina I. Salcido 31 130-04-0180 residential 1947 Ricardo Camacho 2338 E. 22nd Street 32 130-04-0190 vacant lot n/a Ricardo Camacho 2350 E. 22nd Street 33 130-04-0280 commercial business 1998 Saul Olivares 2402 E. 22nd Street 34 130-04-0290 residential 1948 Alicia C. Castellanos 2406-2408 E. 22nd Street 35 130-04-0300 vacant lot n/a Alicia C. Castellanos none given commercial business 36 130-04-0310 n/a Jeanne Ann Huffstetler 2436 E. 22nd Street parking lot 13 13
Tierra Archaeological ReportNo.2009-83 Property ID No. Assessor Parcel Address Property Type Construction Date Owner (Parcel No.) No. (APN) (all Tucson, Arizona 85713) commercial business 37 130-04-0320 n/a Jeanne Ann Huffstetler 2438 E. 22nd Street parking lot commercial 38 130-04-0340 1948 Jeanne Ann Huffstetler 2432 E. 22nd Street shopping center
Note: Bolded parcels are historic in age.
14 14
The project area is located on the Santa Cruz River t4 terrace (McKittrick 1988:5). Soils in the area have been classified as part of the Nickel-Latene-Cave Association consisting of old alluviums derived from igneous rocks (Hendricks 1985:107, Plate 1). Soils visible in the area range from yellowish brown silty loams to solid caliche. Vegetation consists mostly of non-native landscaping plants, but mesquite (Prosopis sp.) and palo verde (Parkinsonia spp.) trees have grown up along drainages and in vacant lots, and small areas of native creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) are present west of South Highland and South Curtis Avenues. PREVIOUS RESEARCH Prior to our field survey, Tierra personnel performed a Class I archaeological records check at the Archaeological Records Office of the Arizona State Museum (ASM) and its affiliated online data- base, AZSITE. This was done to determine what surveys had previously been performed and which sites had been recorded within 1 mile of the current project area. Fourteen sites were previously recorded and are listed in Table 3 and shown on Figure 6. Sixty-seven previous surveys were identified and are listed in Table 4 and shown in Figure 7.
A perusal of a Government Land Office map filed on July 31, 1876, found no buildings, roads, or other entities that might be considered a cultural resource if present today. A road labeled “Tucson and Apache Pass” is shown as running just south of the southernmost part of the APE. Because roads and other features depicted on GLO maps are sometimes not precisely plotted, special attention was given to determining if the road did cross the project APE. The area has undergone extensive development, however, and no trace of the road was found.
Table 3. Previously Recorded Sites within 1 Mile of the Current Survey Area Temporal Site No. Description Placement AZ BB:13:38(ASM) Barrio Libre Historic District 1800–1950 AZ BB:13:76(ASM) Armory Park Historic District 1800–1950 AZ BB:13:125(ASM) historic well and associated artifact scatter 1800–1950 AZ BB:13:577(ASM) El Paso and South Western Railroad; constructed in 1912 1900–1950 AZ BB:13:679(ASM) Tucson and Nogales Railroad, built ca. 1909 to 1910 1900–1950 AZ BB:13:721(ASM) Arizona Ice and Cold Storage Company Plant 1900–1950 AZ BB:13:739(ASM) historic foundations 1900–1950 AZ BB:13:748(ASM) historic Tucson Ariport 1900–1950 AZ BB:13:763(ASM) historic trash concentration 1900–1950 AZ EE:1:300(ASM) Twin Buttes Railroad 1900–1950 AZ FF:9:17(ASM) State Route 80 1900–1950 AZ I:3:10(ASM) State Route 89 1900–1950 AZ U:13:248(ASM) State Route 93 1900–1950 AZ Z:2:40(ASM) Southern Pacific Railroad-Mainline 1900–1950
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 15
Figure 6. Map of previously recorded sites within 1 mile of the current survey area.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 16
Table 4. Previous Surveys within 1 Mile of the Current Survey Area Project No. Recording Institution Description Report Reference Bureau of Land 11-42-19F.BLM block none found Management Bureau of Land 11-42-5E.BLM block none found Management linear survey of the Kommerska and Breternitz 1955-3.ASM Southern Pacific Southern Pacific Railroad 1955; Holzkamper and right-of-way McConville n.d. 1970-9.ASM Arizona State Museum linear for Kino Parkway none found 1980-155.ASM Arizona State Museum linear for water line Adams et al. 1980 1981-29.ASM Arizona State Museum block for post office Urban 1981 block for road 1982-3.ASM Arizona State Museum Urban 1982 improvements 1983-6.ASM Arizona State Museum block for drainage Urban 1983 1984-60.ASM Arizona State Museum block for detention basins Strand 1984 Archaeological 1987-141.ASM linear for water main Euler 1987 Consulting Services Cultural and block for water valve 1991-109.ASM Slawson 1991 Environmental Systems stations 1992-230.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear, for water main Clark 1992 Cultural and block for post office 1994-119.ASM Boatwright 1994 Environmental Systems expansion 1995-329.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Swartz 1995 1996-111.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for utilities Lindeman 1996 1996-286.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Sliva 1996 1997-28.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Eppley 1997e 1997-29.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for well connection Eppley 1997d 1997-33.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Eppley 1997b 1997-34.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Eppley 1997c 1997-35.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Eppley 1997a Archaeological 1997-116.ASM block for development Aguila 1997 Consulting Services, Ltd. 1997-320.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Stevens 1997 1997-322.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Thiel 1998 1998-37.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Vint 1998a linear for water main 1998-38.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Vint 1998d replacement 1998-44.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Vint 1998b linear for road 1998-139.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Sliva 1998 improvements 1998-141.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Vint 1998c
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 17
Project No. Recording Institution Description Report Reference block for intersection 1998-311.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 1998 improvements Tierra Archaeological and block for natural gas line 1998-580.ASM Environmental Zaglauer 2001 construction Consultants 1999-49.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 1999a 1999-102.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for water main Eppley 1999a 1999-103.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Wöcherl 1999 1999-147.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for traffic signals Eppley 1999b block for CAP water main 1999-348.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 1999b access 1999-355.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for well site Diehl 1999c SWCA, Inc., 1999-587.ASM Environmental linear for fiber optics line Doak 1999a–d Consultants Western Cultural 2000-826.ASM linear for fiber optics line Kearns et al. 2001 Resource Management block-for water main 2001-41.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Brack 2001b construction sites 2001-139.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Brack 2001a block for housing 2001-243.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 2001a development block for housing 2001-399.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 2001b development Western Cultural 2001-715.ASM linear for fiber optics line Smith and Wheeler 2001 Resource Management Old Pueblo linear for water main 2002-52.ASM Jones and Dart 2002 Archaeological Center replacement 2002-249.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Diehl 2002b 2002-250.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Diehl 2002a linear for South Park Back 2002-316.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 2002d to Basics project 2002-319.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2002c 2002-328.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2002e 2002-372.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Diehl 2002f 2003-287.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2003d 2003-384.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2003c 2003-398.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2003e 2003-1217.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2003f 2003-1218.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Diehl 2003g 2003-1229.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. block for development Cook 2003
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 18
Project No. Recording Institution Description Report Reference Harris Environmental 2003-1318-ASM linear for utilities work Fahrni 2003a–b Group 2003-1490.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Diehl 2003b 2004-324.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. linear for utilities work Diehl 2003a linear for bridge 2004-481.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Diehl 2004 construction linear for sidewalk 2004-1035.ASM Desert Archaeology, Inc. Hall 2004 construction Tierra Right of Way block for evaluation of 3T0-053A Doak 2003 Services, Ltd. historic structure Tierra Right of Way 4T0-130 block for development Doak 2005 Services, Ltd. Tierra Right of Way 4T0-151A block for development Doak 2004 Services, Ltd. Tierra Right of Way block for cellular phone 6T0-122A Hamlin 2006 Services, Ltd. tower block for DeMeester Tierra Right of Way 8T6-005 Outdoor Performance Hushour 2008 Services, Ltd. Center improvements
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 19
Figure 7. Map of previous surveys within 1 mile of the current survey area.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 20
CULTURAL HISTORY
Paleoindian and Early Archaic Periods (11,000–6000 B.C.) The first known inhabitants of southern Arizona are referred to by archaeologists as Paleoindians. These groups were migratory peoples who entered North America during the Pleistocene epoch. Two classic characteristics of Paleoindian sites are the presence of fluted, lanceolate projectile points (Clovis points; see below) and the fossil remains of now extinct species, particularly Pleistocene megafauna such as mammoth (Mammuthus spp.) and ancient bison (Bison antiquus) (Reid and Whittlesey 1997:30–37). The Paleoindians were originally conceptualized purely as big-game hunters, but it is now understood that these people actually exploited a spectrum of biological resources that were in some ways akin to later Archaic subsistence strategies (Mabry 1998:105–107).
The earliest definitively dated archaeological sites in the Southwest are Clovis occupations, typified by Clovis points. These points display concave bases, basal fluting, and lateral and marginal grinding (Slaughter 1992:72). Several important Clovis sites, including Naco, Lehner, Escapule, and Murray Springs, are located in the upper San Pedro River valley of southeastern Arizona (Faught and Freeman 1998:41). At the Murray Springs site, two Clovis points were found in association with an unbutchered mammoth. Apart from these sites, much of the evidence for a Clovis presence in Arizona is reflected in isolated occurrences of Clovis points (either whole or fragments). Clovis points are known from the St. Johns and Winslow areas, for example (Neily 1985:10), and from the San Pedro River valley near Kartchner Caverns (Faught and Freeman 1998:44). In Tucson, a Clovis point was discovered in a disturbed context at the Valencia site (Doelle 1985:181). The Clovis complex was succeeded by the Folsom complex, which, like the Clovis, is typified by its distinctive projectile points. Folsom points, unlike Clovis points, have flutes that extend all the way from their proximal to distal ends and have pressure-flaked marginal edges. In Arizona, the only known Folsom points have been found in surface contexts on the Colorado Plateau and the mountain transition zone to the south of the Mogollon Rim (Faught and Freeman 1998:45).
The Early Archaic period (ca. 8500–6000 B.C.) is known in southern Arizona as the Sulphur Spring phase. This phase was originally defined by Sayles and Antevs in 1941 in the Sulphur Springs Valley in southeastern Arizona (Sayles and Antevs 1941). Problems with dating (a result of the work having taken place prior to the development of carbon-dating techniques) originally led Sayles to conclude that a Paleoindian tradition (typified by the exploitation of megafauna) coexisted here with a hunt- ing-and-gathering tradition that exploited smaller game and various plant resources, as reflected in an artifact assemblage composed of flat milling stones, unifacial scrapers, and other lithic imple- ments. This assessment turned out to be incorrect; however, a reexamination of the material from the Sulphur Springs Valley did establish a reliable beginning date for the Sulphur Spring phase. Even though they have now been dated with certainty, the sites investigated by Sayles did not include any artifacts (e.g., projectile points) that were stylistically distinctive and, therefore, temporally diagnostic.
In southern Arizona, there has been an overall lack of diagnostic projectile points recovered from Early Archaic sites that can be directly correlated in time with the Sulphur Spring phase. It is therefore difficult to date sites to this phase when other, more-direct methods of dating, such as radiocarbon dating, cannot be used (Huckell 1996:329). One exception to this lack of diagnostic artifacts at Sulphur Spring phase sites is Ventana Cave, where 17 stemmed Ventana-Amargosa points were recovered by Haury (1950) under the Red Sand deposit. The stratigraphic location of
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 21
these points suggested they were manufactured and deposited sometime after 6700 B.C. Similar points have been reported from Archaic contexts in the northern Santa Rita Mountains, but again, no associated datable material was found in the same context as the points (Huckell 1996:330–331).
Middle Archaic Period (6000–2100 B.C.) The Middle Archaic period, also known as the Chiricahua phase of the Cochise culture in the tripartite stage designation schema of Sayles and Antevs (1941) and Sayles (1945), is part of the broader cultural entity that archaeologists have conceptualized as the Archaic period. In terms of material culture, the Middle Archaic period is typified by the addition of shallow basin metates, mortars and pestles, various bifacial tools, and distinctive side-notched projectile points to the overall tool assemblage of the preceding Early Archaic period. Generally, the Middle Archaic period is viewed as a time when regional variations in this material culture across the Southwest became less pronounced. In particular, notched projectile points take on a general similarity of design over large geographic regions. Chiricahua points, for example, are similar in style and manufacturing technique to Pinto and San Jose points, which are found in other areas of Arizona (Slaughter 1992:70); it is thought that this uniformity of technology is related to the high degree of mobility that was presumably characteristic of populations living during this period. Similarly, concave-base Cortaro points, often associated with the succeeding Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period but that are also present in Middle Archaic contexts, are widely distributed across southern Arizona and have possible equivalents in southern New Mexico and California (Justice 2002:181–182).
In the Tucson Basin, surface Middle Archaic period sites are known from montane and bajada con- texts, with the typical artifacts mentioned above in addition to fire-cracked rock and occasional rock cairn burials (Huckell 1995:3). Subsurface Middle Archaic remains are known from two sites in the Santa Cruz River valley—the Los Pozos (Gregory 1999) and Rillito Fan sites (Wallace 1996).
Late Archaic–Early Agricultural Period (2100 B.C.–A.D. 150) As the name implies, the Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period in the Southwest is marked by the widespread adaptation of cultivated food resources. In this region, this period is also marked by the appearance of permanent or semipermanent domestic architecture; canal irrigation; and the first Mesoamerican cultivars, which arrived as early as the beginning of the second millennium B.C. (Huckell 1996:343), although maize may have arrived somewhat earlier. At the same time, the period is generally thought to be a time in which people continued a lifeway that remained relatively mobile with the objective of exploiting wild food resources; sites that reflect these activities continue to be categorized under the designation of Late Archaic (Huckell 1995). This period is thought to be one in which groups of people practicing a relatively mobile lifeway began, over a long span of time, to incorporate agricultural products as significant elements of their subsistence.
Work in the Southwest during the past three decades (particularly in the Santa Cruz River valley) has resulted in the discovery of numerous Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period sites and the establishment of a phase sequence for the period. The earliest phase (dated 2100–1500 B.C.) is presently unnamed and is defined by the first appearance of maize; pepo squash (Cucurbita pepo); storage pits; and large, circular pit structures. Fired sherds (perhaps from incipient vessels) and figurine fragments that date to about 2100 B.C. have been recovered in the Tucson Basin (Mabry 2007:7). The San Pedro phase (1500–800 B.C.) continued to include these attributes, with the addition of a hallmark of the phase, corner-notched San Pedro dart points and, in the San Pedro core area, Empire points (Mabry 2007:Figure 1.3). Cultivars added to the crop complex included
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 22
cotton (Gossypium sp.) and possibly the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Also appearing during the San Pedro phase were specialized storage structures with large, interior bell-shaped pits; oval and round house-in-pit type structures; a wider variety of functional extramural pits; flexed inhumations, often in cemeteries; stone and bone pipes; distinctive ceramic figurines; canid burials; refinements in ground stone technology; and, in the Santa Cruz River valley, canal-irrigated farming (Mabry 2007:7– 9, 15–18). Large, communal-ritual pit structures (perhaps descendents of even larger pre–San Pedro types) were present during the San Pedro phase. The bow and arrow may also have appeared in the Southwest during this time.
The Cienega phase completes the Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period phase sequence. The Cienega phase was initially proposed by Huckell (1995) and is marked by the appearance of Cienega points, which are distinguished morphologically by deep, oblique corner-notching and flaring stems and were used as dart and possibly arrow points (Lorentzen 1998:150). The Cienega phase was also characterized by an emphasis on large, circular pit structures that often had cylindrical and, less frequently, bell-shaped subfloor pits (Huckell 1995); a more diverse ground stone artifact assemblage that included stone disks and well-made stone trays; and large, communal houses that may have developed from San Pedro phase predecessors.
Early Ceramic Period (A.D. 150–650) In both the Tucson and Phoenix Basins, the Early Ceramic period appears to have developed out of the cultural matrix of the Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period; work in the Tucson area in particular has, over the past several years, yielded a large amount of data supporting this idea. Sites in the Tucson region where the Early Ceramic period has been studied extensively include the Houghton Road site (Ciolek-Torrello 1998) and several sites along the Santa Cruz River.
Two Early Ceramic phases have been proposed for the Tucson Basin: the Agua Caliente and the Tortolita. The Agua Caliente phase (A.D. 150–450) is marked by the appearance of plain ware vessels produced by the coil-and-scrape technique and represents the ceramic plain ware horizon in the Tucson Basin. Vessel forms across the Southwest at this time consisted predominately of neckless seed jars, which were well suited for storage purposes, and small hemispherical bowls. This phase was also characterized by an assemblage of milling stones, an expedient flaked stone industry accompanied by a remnant Archaic period bifacial tool technology, and domestic and communal pit houses (Whittlesey and Heckman 2000a:6). Flexed inhumations and small grinding equipment typical of the Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period continued into this phase (Ciolek-Torrello 1995:542). Architecture became more formal in design, with houses incorporating formal plastered hearths and clearly defined entryways. House shapes are generally rectangular, or in some cases kidney-bean shaped, with plastered pillars or post supports on either side of the house entryways. The communal structures are larger but share morphological attributes of the smaller houses and are strikingly similar to Mogollon communal structures, which eventually evolved into Great Kivas (Reid and Whittlesey 1997:143).
The Tortolita phase (A.D. 450–650) represents the red ware horizon in the Tucson Basin and corre- sponds approximately with the beginning of the Vahki phase (characterized by Vahki Red Ware) in the Phoenix Basin. Tortolita Red is hard slipped (usually, but not always, on both vessel surfaces) and is typically sand tempered (Bernard-Shaw 1990; Heidke 2003:148). An additional important change in ceramic manufacture during the Tortolita phase is the expansion of vessel forms from the Agua Caliente–type seed jar to a variety of vessel forms (including flared-rim forms) intended for
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 23
cooking and serving (Heidke 2003:148). Tortolita phase settlements are larger with more formal patterning than previous Agua Caliente phase settlements, were increasingly dependent on maize, and a placed greater emphasis on sedentism. In the Santa Cruz River valley, Tortolita phase sites or sites with a Tortolita component have become relatively well documented and are currently more well known than Agua Caliente sites.
Pioneer Period (A.D. 650–750) The Pioneer period in the Tucson Basin is not currently well understood. As mentioned earlier, the first phase of the Pioneer period, the Vahki phase of the Salt-Gila Basin, is equivalent to the Tortolita phase red ware horizon in the Tucson Basin. The remaining phases of the Salt-Gila sequence—Estrella, Sweetwater, and Snaketown—are marked by the appearance of decorated pottery. The Estrella phase pottery (Estrella Red-on-gray) is distinguished by painted, broadline designs in quartered layouts (typically within bowl interiors). It has been suggested that the appearance of this pottery tradition marks a broadline ceramic horizon, similar to the earlier plain and red ware horizons (Whittlesey and Heckman 2000a:8). Incised pottery also appeared during the Estrella phase (Whittlesey and Heckman 2000b:98).
In the Tucson Basin, red ware ceramics continued to be produced into the Cañada del Oro phase (Wallace et al. 1995:596), and the beginning of the broadline horizon appears to be more reflective of an addition of broadline decorated pottery to the existing plain and red ware ceramic complex. Broadline ceramics are not common in the Tucson Basin and appear to have been restricted to a relatively short span of time. Similar remarks apply to Sweetwater Red-on-gray and Snaketown Red- on-buff ceramics, which display fine-lined and increasingly elaborate designs.
It is during the final phase of the Pioneer period, the Snaketown phase, that distinctly Hohokam traits in material culture become evident in the Tucson Basin (in ceramic design and other technologies). The Snaketown phase, when true red-on-buff ceramics began to be produced, has been viewed by some archaeologists as being the actual beginning of what can be reliably defined as Hohokam, although others believe that Hohokam culture cannot be defined until the Colonial period, when hallmark traits such as ballcourts and a distinctive mortuary complex appeared (Wallace et al. 1995:576, 606).
The Pioneer period in the Tucson Basin, if accepted as being truly present at all, lasted approximately a century. It was characterized by a temporally limited appearance of the broadline horizon in the form of Estrella and Sweetwater Red-on-gray ceramics, with a similarly brief appearance of the Snaketown phase (at least in terms of ceramic tradition) as a precursor to the Cañada del Oro phase.
Colonial Period (A.D. 750–950) The Tucson Basin Colonial period comprises two phases, the Cañada del Oro (A.D. 750–850) and the Rillito (A.D. 850–950). Several distinguishing cultural traits mark the advent of the Colonial period; some of these will be described briefly.
Canal irrigation had been widespread in the Salt-Gila Basin during the Snaketown phase and continued to expand there during the Colonial period. Ballcourts were spaced at an average of 5.5 km (3.4 miles) along the Phoenix canals, suggesting that ballcourts served to identify their villages as the centers of “irrigation communities” (Wilcox and Sternberg 1983). During the Colonial period,
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 24
the Santa Cruz River was recovering from a period of entrenchment that had begun about 50 B.C. This resulted in an environment that was increasingly conducive to floodwater farming (Waters 1992:175). Settlement expanded in the Tucson Basin, with ballcourt villages being constructed in the Santa Cruz River valley at several sites. Ballcourts, primary indicators of Mesoamerican influence in the Southwest at this time (Wilcox and Sternberg 1983), likely served as focal points for regional socioeconomic interaction. The large communal houses that had been constructed at many sites from the Late Archaic–Early Agricultural period onward disappeared during the Colonial period. Village settlement was patterned on individual houses organized into house clusters (also termed courtyard groups) that were oriented around a central plaza—a pattern that was already evident during the Pioneer period. Ceramic design began incorporating zoomorphic and anthropomorphic imagery and micaceous temper, which has been interpreted as a result of cultural influence originating in the Salt-Gila Basin (Wallace et al. 1995:601, 605–607).
Cremation burial virtually replaced inhumation burial by the middle of the Colonial period (Wilcox 1991:270). Even though this trait is a defining characteristic of the Colonial period, it, like the courtyard group settlement pattern, had precedents in the Pioneer period (Crown 1991:145–146). Hohokam cremation burials typically included palettes, worked shell, and stone censers as mortuary offerings. The cremations were placed in discrete cemeteries that became components of the typical Hohokam village and are frequently associated with plazas and house groups and their accom- panying trash mounds. Such cemeteries were apparently associated with the suprahouseholds represented by the house cluster–plaza–trash mound complexes (Wilcox 1991:256).
Sedentary Period (A.D. 950–1150) The Sedentary period in the Tucson Basin is divided into three subphases: the Early, Middle, and Late Rincon. In the Salt-Gila Basin, it is composed of a single phase, the Sacaton. During the Early Rincon subphase (A.D. 950–1000), the settlements that had been established along major drainages during the Colonial period increased in size, and new settlements expanded along secondary drainages and into bajada environments, which allowed for a diversification of agricultural strategies (Crown 1991:149; Wellman and Lascaux 1999:24). Major habitation sites were established at regular intervals along waterways. Villages continued to resemble their Colonial predecessors with their ballcourts and plaza-oriented clusters of dwellings, but smaller settlement types (such as farmsteads) started to appear around the peripheries of larger villages. The construction of ballcourts, and the intricate trade network associated with them, reached its maximum extent during the Sedentary period (Doyel 1991b:247), although their construction decreased in the Tucson Basin.
In ceramics, design motifs took on increasingly geometric forms. Sedentary motifs were less carefully executed than the fine-line work of Colonial period ceramics. The distinctive Gila shoulder, which was formed by the sides of a vessel sloping downward sharply from the neck to create a low shoulder near the base, became a diagnostic marker of the Sedentary period. Red ware also began to be produced again (after having been abandoned around the end of the Cañada del Oro phase in Tucson). Mortuary practice continued to consist of cremation as the most common form of burial, but inhumations became more frequent after having been very uncommon or nonexistent during the Colonial period (Crown 1991:149–150). Copper bells, imported from western Mexico, first appeared during the Sedentary period, and shell etching was another innovation in material culture (Haury 1976:319).
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 25
Around A.D. 1000, at the beginning of the Middle Rincon subphase (A.D. 1000–1100), the Santa Cruz River again became entrenched. One result of this was a shift in settlement to the north and to the eastern region of the valley (Waters 1992:175–177). This in turn resulted in increasingly scattered settlements as villages became less riverine oriented, at least in this area of the Tucson Basin. In the eastern Tucson region, established villages continued to expand. By the Late Rincon subphase, the continued adaptation of farming strategies (such as ak chin and runoff diversion) to secondary drainages and bajadas had become widespread, with some of these niches being farmed for the first time. Environmental uncertainty may have served as the stimulus for non-floodwater farming. For example, there was an increased emphasis on the cultivation of agave (Agave spp.) on bajadas (Doyel 1991b:246; Whittlesey 2004:26–27).
During the final years of the Rincon phase, the ballcourt system began to decline, although ballcourts continued to be constructed into the Soho phase in the Phoenix region (Crown 1991:151– 152). Formally constructed platform mounds—in contrast to caliche-capped trash mounds, which are known from the Snaketown phase—began to be constructed and eventually eclipsed ballcourts as the primary form of public architecture by about A.D. 1200 (Doyel 2000:308). This has been interpreted as a change in overall polity as the Hohokam regional system and its accompanying trade relationships collapsed, or at least were reorganized (Crown and Judge 1991:297). This change may likewise be reflected in the construction of single-room structures (possibly associated with rituals) on the mound summits and the incorporation of surrounding palisades and, later, adobe-walled compounds (Doyel 2000:305–307).
Classic Period (A.D. 1150–1450) Southern Arizona societies experienced drastic changes during the Classic period—settlement patterns shifted and public and domestic architecture changed. In the Tucson Basin, these changes occurred in two broad phases, the Tanque Verde (A.D. 1150–1300) and the Tucson (A.D. 1300– 1450). During the Tanque Verde phase, Tanque Verde Red-on-brown became common across southern Arizona, while in Phoenix the production of red-on-buff ceramics declined (Reid and Whittlesey 1997). Some researchers have suggested that the widespread appearance of Tanque Verde Red-on-brown reflects an increasing complexity in the configuration of Hohokam economic and social relationships (Slaughter and Roberts 1996:14). While pit house architecture continued, above- ground adobe or stone masonry structures, which were constructed within surrounding compound walls, became common. These structures were frequently freestanding, unlike multiroom pueblos commonly constructed elsewhere in the Southwest (Rice 2003:10).
In the Phoenix Basin, the platform mounds that appeared during the Soho phase were generally constructed at sites with extant ballcourts and were spaced along canals at 5-km-intervals (3.1-mile- intervals). The location of the mounds in relation to the canal system could suggest that the mounds marked the centers of irrigation communities during this period, much like the ballcourts did in the Colonial period (Crown 1991). In the Tucson Basin, ballcourt construction had ceased by the Classic period, but the Marana community flourished (Fish et al. 1992). The Marana community extended across the northern circumference of the Tucson Basin and consisted of numerous types of sites centered around a platform mound (the Marana Mound site) that had replaced the regional ballcourts as the focal point of social integration. The community also had extensive agricultural fields that were irrigated by both dry-farming techniques and canals. Agave was the principal crop grown in these fields, presumably expanding from agave cultivation within the bajada environments that began during the Rincon phase (Fish et al. 1992:21–24). Agave is more drought resistant than
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 26
many of the other Hohokam cultivars, which would have made it a reliable food source during the drier climatic conditions that prevailed during the early Classic period (Masse 1991). A serious drought, sometimes called the Great Drought, occurred between A.D. 1276 and 1299 (Reid and Whittlesey 1999:17). The Great Drought had the effect of forcing people who lived in regions north of the Mogollon Rim to travel southward across and off the Colorado Plateau in search of food sources, because local agriculture had failed and could not support the population base. This resulted in an intercultural exchange between several cultural groups, including the Mogollon, Hohokam, Salado, and Paquimé cultures. Some Anasazi migrants from the Kayenta region arrived in southeastern Arizona as well, as reflected at Reeve Ruin in the San Pedro River valley (Whittlesey and Heckman 2000a:14).
During the Tucson phase, the cultural interaction that resulted from the drought became the impetus for further widespread social changes. Following the abandonment of many of the Tanque Verde phase sites, settlements aggregated into fewer (but larger) sites. This has been interpreted as a defensive tactic in the face of an increasing threat of warfare (Doelle and Wallace 1991:331). Freestanding adobe structures declined, and contiguous (sometimes multistoried) room blocks and stronger, more substantial walls became the structure of choice (Doyel 1991a:253). Great houses, notably at Casa Grande and Pueblo Grande, appear at this time. The great houses at both sites were constructed on platform mounds. Village settlements frequently consisted of multiple compounds, occasionally concentrically arranged around a central compound-mound (such as at Casa Grande and Los Muertos), similar to the older village plan of house clusters arranged around a central plaza, such as at Snaketown (Doyel 1991a:254–256).
After the beginning of the Tucson phase, evidence for the Salado culture appears in southeastern Arizona in the form of Roosevelt Red Ware ceramics, and it has been thought that the Salado superseded the Hohokam in the lower San Pedro River valley (in the region north of Benson) at about this time (Phillips et al. 1993). The culture known by archaeologists as “Salado” was initially formulated in the 1920s to describe and explain sites in the Tonto Basin and the upper Salt River that, on one hand, had a strong resemblance to Mogollon sites but at the same time possessed Hohokam traits, such as platform mounds (but, perhaps significantly, not ballcourts). Initially, it was thought that the Salado were pueblo-dwelling people migrating from the north and expanding into the Tonto Basin whose lifeways were imposed upon or adopted by the Hohokam people already living there. Archaeologists Florence Hawley and Harold Gladwin hypothesized that this migration originated from two areas: the upper Gila region and, later, from the Little Colorado area. Finally, Emil Haury presented a somewhat modified version of the migration model, concluding that the Salado peoples did not “invade” the Hohokam so much as coexist in the same geographical region (Reid and Whittlesey 1997:238–239). Eventually, the migration hypothesis fell into disfavor, and by the 1980s, most Southwestern archaeologists had come to believe that the Salado had developed “in place” from extant Hohokam populations, the result of increased “social complexity” rather than an influx of new people. Recent speculation on the Salado has led to a reconsideration of the migration model (Elson et al. 2000:175), resulting from the intense demographic movements during the Classic period.
Protohistoric Period (A.D. 1450–1540) The Protohistoric period, the era between the end of the Classic period and the arrival of the Spanish missionaries, is an obscure period in the prehistory of the Southwest. This period is not well represented in the archaeological record, yet early Spanish explorers did encounter people who were
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 27
well established in some areas of the Southwest. The fundamental question pertaining to this era is, who were these Piman-speaking peoples, such as the Sobaipuri of the San Pedro Valley?
There are two potential answers to this question. One is that the Piman-speaking people living in southern Arizona were simply direct descendants of the Hohokam populations who had faced the social and economic changes that marked the end of the Classic period. The other is that after the decline of the Hohokam and Salado cultures, the Pimans moved into the area essentially as a new cultural entity, although they may have integrated with people who were already present—a possibility suggested by oral tradition (Teague 1993:444).
The possibility that Piman speakers were direct descendants of the Hohokam is suggested by the descriptive accounts of the Spanish as they moved northwest from central Mexico into what is now Sonora and Arizona. They found that the majority of people across this region practiced agriculture as a subsistence base. This subsistence strategy differed from those of the people in the surrounding regions of California and the Great Basin and the Athabaskan speakers in the northeast where hunting and foraging prevailed. Second, little or no political unity was noted by the Spanish beyond the level of individual and autonomous rancherías—a system of organization unlike that encountered by the Spanish in Aztec-dominated central Mexico. Finally, trade across the region, although sporadic and not regularized, was widespread and generally did not involve food and tools but emphasized luxury and ceremonial items instead (Spicer 1962:8–15). All of these traits might be expected to have been present at the time of European contact. Agriculture and trade had long been the norm, and the rancherías were perhaps the result of the social reorganization that occurred at the end of the Classic period.
In contrast, Teague (1993) suggests that both linguistics and Piman oral traditions support the idea that the Piman speakers the Spanish encountered had migrated into the region from elsewhere. Linguistically, there is continuity between west-central Mexico and southern Arizona that likely existed prehistorically and was paralleled by some aspects of material culture, notably ballcourts (Kelley 1991). This continuity exists among people speaking variants of the Tepiman language group. The languages spoken by some of the people in Sonora and southern Arizona belong to the Piman people who were one of the members of the Tepiman group.
The oral traditions of the Piman people in southern Arizona are consistent with both the archaeological record and the linguistic model described above. These traditions focus on the conflict between Elder Brother, I’itoi, the cultural hero of the Tohono O’odham (who is known as Siuuhu among the Akimel O’odham), and the Sivanyi (or Siwani), a term which the Pimans applied, in different versions of their oral traditions, to either a specific priest (Saxton and Saxton 1973:147– 168), or to the priesthood in general, of a rival group. The term Sivanyi may be related linguistically to Shiwanni, the Zuni directional rain priesthoods, with whom strong functional parallels can also be drawn (Teague 1993:439). The traditions state that warfare erupted between Sivanyi and I’itoi and his followers, whom (depending on the account) he either gathered together from among the O’odham people of northern Sonora, or who emerged from beneath the earth from a point south of Baboquivari. There are rather detailed accounts of the progression of the war against the Sivanyi and the eventual victory of I’itoi’s warriors. Following the conflict and the disposal of the Sivanyi priesthood, the warriors dispersed. Some returned south to the Lower Piman homeland, and some went north to the pueblos, but some remained in the Gila Valley and intermarried into the local (Hohokam?) population, eventually becoming the Pimas Gileños (Teague 1993:444). From the
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 28
foregoing, it appears plausible that these traditions telling of a rebellion against a priestly hegemony at the end of the Classic period echo events that also are reflected in the archaeological record.
The Spanish, then, likely entered a world that had undergone traumatic social and environmental changes just before their arrival. It was also during this time (around A.D. 1600) that groups of Athabaskan-speaking people (Apaches) began to migrate to the area from the north and east.
Historic Period (A.D. 1540–1950) Spanish exploration of the Southwest began as early as 1539 with the preliminary scouting expedition of Fray Marcos de Niza, who had been sent to the region by Mexican viceroy Antonio de Mendoza in response to the accounts of Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca and Estevan, who had wandered to Sonora after being shipwrecked in the Gulf of Mexico in 1528. After de Niza returned, Viceroy Mendoza proposed a larger expedition and selected Francisco Vásquez de Coronado as its leader. Coronado’s party departed in 1540 in search of the fabled Seven Cities of Cibola. The route of the expedition probably took Coronado through what is now eastern Arizona, although at one time it was speculated that one stop on the journey, Chichilticale or Red House, was in fact the Hohokam adobe house at Casa Grande (Wilson 1999:25–26).
Jesuit missionary Eusebio Francisco Kino arrived in Sonora in 1681. After a poorly documented visit to the Casa Grande area in 1694, Kino made a second entrada into the area in 1697 (Wilson 1999:24). Setting out from the Nuestra Señora de Dolores mission, Kino traveled north along the San Pedro and then followed the Gila to the west, arriving again at Casa Grande on November 18. He was accompanied, in addition to some 20 soldiers and native guides, by Captain Juan Mateo Manje. Manje, unlike Kino, kept well-written journals of his travels. The chronicle of this expedition makes note of small groups of people living along the San Pedro, who were identified as the Sobaipuri (Doelle and Wallace 1990).
Owing to the efforts of Padre Kino, the missionizing of the people of the Pimería Alta continued into the early eighteenth century, although after Kino’s death in 1711, the mission system in Sonora began to deteriorate, partly as a result of neglect while Spain was distracted by the War of Spanish Succession (Walker and Bufkin 1979:14). After the Pima revolted in 1751, the presidio at Tubac was established. It was later relocated to Tucson near the end of 1775. The presidio was intended not only to provide stability for the Pima mission system but also to stem incursions by the Apache. The Apache had been raiding Piman settlements since shortly prior to the time of Kino’s initial contact (Spicer 1962:234), and the escalation of raiding over time resulted in increasing resettlement of the Piman-speaking populace. Beginning around 1790, as a means of bringing raiding to a halt, the Apache were provided with rations and supplies by the Spanish government, an action that allowed for the expansion of ranching and stock raising in what would eventually become southern Arizona. This time of relative peace ended with the independence of Mexico from Spain in 1821, and with Spanish support no longer available, ranching became unviable as the Apache once again began raiding activities (Morrisey 1950:151).
The period between Mexico’s independence and 1846 (the year the Mexican-American War began) is when Euroamericans first began to establish a substantial presence in the middle Gila River region. During the war, the “Army of the West,” under the command of Colonel Stephen Watts Kearny, was assembled for the conquest of the Southwest, or more precisely, California (Sheridan 1995:50–51). The expedition, led by Kearny and guided by Kit Carson, passed along the Gila River
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 29
and made the first accurate cartographic record of the region, which would later establish the route for Americans crossing Arizona on their way to California during the Gold Rush of 1849.
The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, signed in 1848 following the conclusion of the Mexican-Amer- ican War, ceded the portion of what is now Arizona lying north of the Gila River to the United States. The boundary between New Mexico and Texas was established in 1850, at which time the entire region south of the 37th parallel, stretching from the new Texas–New Mexico border west to the eastern boundary of California, became the Territory of New Mexico. In 1854, the Gadsden Purchase expanded New Mexico Territory from the Gila south to the present-day Mexican border (Walker and Bufkin 1979:22). The Territory of Arizona was split off from the Territory of New Mexico in 1863. The railroad, which entered Arizona at Yuma in 1877 (Walker and Bufkin 1979:46), reached Tucson in 1880. Conflict between the Apache and the Euroamerican settlers continued until 1886, when Geronimo surrendered and peace was negotiated (Collins et al. 1993:32). With the end of open hostilities, settlers resumed their migration to the area with the aid of the railroad. Mining and cattle ranching, which had already become fairly well established in Arizona prior to the Civil War, became the Territory’s main industries. Arizona attained statehood in 1912. SURVEY METHODS The survey was conducted in accordance with standards established by the Arizona State Museum for pedestrian surveys on state-administered lands. According to these standards, 100 percent coverage of an area can be claimed if the entire area is surveyed by crews walking transects no more than 20 m (66 feet) apart. Because of the presence of roads, structures, material storage areas, retention basins, and asphalt parking and storage lots, only the areas where the natural ground surface was visible were inspected. These included landscaped and open areas on both sides of South Kino Parkway; a series of vacant lots and open areas along both sides of South Highland, South Curtis, and South Cherry Avenues, and South Cherrybell Stravenue; portions of the Plumer Avenue right-of-way; landscaped and open areas along both sides of 22nd Street between South Park Avenue and Tucson Boulevard; landscaped areas and vacant lots on both sides of the Barraza- Aviation Parkway exit to eastbound 22nd Street; the shoulders of portions of East Willits Way, South Campbell Avenue, East Fairland Stravenue, and East Silverlake Road; and most of the north and northwest shoulder of Silverlake Road (see Figures 2-5). Transects no more than 20 m apart were walked across these areas. A visual inspection of extant residential and commercial properties was also conducted, but no attempts were made to enter occupied privately owned parcels. EVALUATION CRITERIA Any cultural properties identified during the survey would be evaluated in accordance with standards established by the Arizona State Museum (ASM) for state-administered land. These standards require that a property be at least 50 years old. If the property also includes at least 30 artifacts of a single type (i.e., ceramics or lithics), representing the remains of more than a single episode of activity (i.e., the dropping of a single pot or the reduction of a single core into lithic artifacts); or at least 20 artifacts, when two or more types of artifact are present; or a single fixed feature, with any number of artifacts in association; or more than one fixed feature, with or without artifacts in association, then the property must be recorded as an archaeological site. A property of sufficient age that does not meet any of these additional criteria may be recorded as an isolated occurrence.
Cultural properties would be further evaluated with regard to significance, which is assessed largely in terms of a property’s eligibility for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 30
The criteria by which properties are evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP are as follows:
The National Register’s standards for evaluating the significance of properties were developed to recognize the accomplishments of all peoples who have made a significant contribution to our country’s history and heritage. The criteria are designed to guide State and local governments, Federal agencies, and others in evaluating potential entries in the National Register.
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and
A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (National Park Service 1997:2).
In other words, a site’s significance is dependent on its integrity—its retention of its essential form and construction and its continued presence in the setting it was intended to occupy—and on its cultural significance. Note that for this project Tierra considers buildings that will reach the qualifying 50-year mark prior to the scheduled 2014 start of construction as possible qualifying properties. SURVEY RESULTS 2009 Survey Results A large portion of the surveyed area is covered by buildings, in-use roads, and asphalt parking lots so could not be adequately inspected for prehistoric cultural materials. However, the APE is located on the t4 alluvial terrace, an area that lacks a permanent water source and contains only sparse natural resources. In general, prehistoric sites there are limited to light surface artifact scatters and rock- filled thermal features often associated with resource processing. Such sites, if present, would have been destroyed during construction of the buildings, roads, and parking lots. Furthermore, no artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric use of the area was found in any of the open areas or vacant lots inspected for this project. Therefore, it is unlikely that significant prehistoric cultural materials are present.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 31
2011 Survey Results The four lots within the U.S. Post Office compound are completely covered with asphalt so were not walked. The vacant lot east of the Post Office compound was fenced and access was not available but the proposed right-of-way is along the southwestern corner of the parcel. At its widest point, the right-of-way is only 40 feet (12 m) wide. One transect was walked along the outside of the fence along the south and west sides. No prehistoric or historic artifacts were seen along the fence or within the proposed right-of-way. Although the interior of the parcel could not be accessed, it was plainly visible and was only two m beyond the ASM limits at its widest point. No evidence of structure foundations, trash concentrations, or other indications of a historic site could be seen from the fence line. The area is on the t4 terrace approximately three mile east of the Santa Cruz River in an area completely lacking dependable water sources. No prehistoric artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric use of the area was visible along the fence line (or in any of the areas inspected in 2009). Therefore, Tierra feels it is unlikely that significant prehistoric materials are present in the area.
The proposed construction easement on Union Pacific Rail Road property is across a vacant lot and portions of the vacated Warehouse Avenue right-of-way east of a University of Arizona auction yard. A portion of the auction yard was also inspected. The extended railroad yard access inspected on April 12, 2011, is within an existing, paved access road. No artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric or historic use of the area were found.
The linear parcel between Highland and Curtis Avenues surveyed on April 12, 2011, is along the southern edge of a vacant lot that was graded at some point in time. No artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric or historic use of the area was visible.
Two parcels were surveyed on April 21, 2011. The first of these was an approximately 8-foot-wide linear parcel immediately south of 22nd Street, beginning at Park Avenue and extending eastward 790 feet across an approximately 240-foot landscaped area in front of a Diamond Shamrock service station, and the northern end of a vacant lot that once contained a used car dealership. The vacant lot was once a paved parking lot for the car dealership, and remnant pavement is still present over most of the project area. The second parcel was a 24-foot-wide right-of-way for the realignment of Silverlake Road, beginning at Fairland Stravenue and extending southwestward 380 feet. An estimated half of this area is within the existing pavement of Silverlake Road. No artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric or historic use of either area were visible.
The linear parcel along Silverlake Road, between Cherry Avenue and Cherrybell Starvenue, was surveyed on May 16, 2011. Virtually all of the southern and southeastern shoulder of the road was chip sealed, modified by sidewalks and parkways, or landscaped. Much of the northern and northwestern shoulder was exposed and unpaved, but had been scraped and leveled to grade. Some portions of the north/northwest side of the road had been chip sealed or otherwise landscaped as well. No artifacts or other evidence of prehistoric or historic use of the area was observed. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Historic cultural materials are present in the inspected project area. Many of the residential structures within the APE are themselves historic in age, having been constructed between 1947 and 1961 (see Figures 2–5; see Tables 1, 2). A neighborhood shopping center constructed in 1948 at 2432 East 22nd Street is also considered a historic property, as is a now-defunct convenience store
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 32
built in 1955 at 1850 East 22nd Street and a 1964 property that will be 50 years old by the 2014 construction date. Also, a residential structure built in 1953 is now listed as a commercial property.
Tierra recommends that a Historic Properties Assessment be conducted to study the historic architecture and other historic cultural features located within the project area, to evaluate these properties as to their eligibility for listing in the NRHP or the State Register of Cultural Properties (SRCP), and to minimize the impact of the project on these historic cultural resources. This assessment should be performed by qualified architectural historians, and should include evaluation of these properties for listing in the NRHP or SRCP; detailed mapping and recording of eligible properties, including historic landscaping, signage, and any other significant cultural features; recording of non-eligible properties that have not been recorded previously; a description of the styles and types of historic properties and a history of development along this portion of 22nd Street; and a recommendation regarding the impact of the road improvements.
No prehistoric artifacts, ashy soil, or other indications of prehistoric use of the area were found during the 2009 and 2011 surveys. Given the area’s complete lack of dependable water sources prehistorically, it is unlikely that significant prehistoric cultural materials are present.
The client and all subcontractors are reminded that in accordance with ARS§41-844, the person supervising any survey, excavation, construction, or like activity on state-administered lands is required, upon incidentally encountering cultural deposits more than 50 years old, to immediately halt all work and notify the Director of the ASM of the finding, so that a consultation process can be initiated and an appropriate course of treatment decided upon. Work in the area is not to resume until authorization is received from the Director of the ASM.
The client and all subcontractors also are reminded that, in accordance with ARS§41-865, should buried human remains or funerary goods be encountered incidentally on private lands during any ground-disturbing activities associated with the current project or any follow-up work done at any time in the future, all such work must immediately be halted in the vicinity of the finding and the Director of the Arizona State Museum must immediately be informed, so that a consultation process can be initiated and an appropriate course of treatment decided upon. Under the statute the Director must make an initial response to such a notification within ten working days; there is, however, no specified limit on the length of time that work may be delayed in order to deal with the finding in an appropriate manner. In any case, work is not to resume until authorization is received from the museum director. Should the Director fail to respond to the notification within the ten-day window provided in the statute, it can be assumed that authorization to resume work has been given.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 33
REFERENCES Adams, Rex, Lisa Huckell, and Susan Brew 1980 Project P-80-20. Manuscript on file, Arizona State Museum site files, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Aguila, Lourdes 1997 Archaeological Survey for Tucson Mission Industries, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Archaeological Consulting Services, Ltd., Tempe.
Bernard-Shaw, Mary 1990 Archaeological Investigations at the Lonetree Site, AA:12:120(ASM), in the Northern Tucson Basin. Technical Report No. 90-1. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.
Boatwright, Mark 1994 A Biological Assessment and Cultural Resource Inventory of the USPS Tucson GMF Expansion. Cultural and Environmental Systems, Tucson.
Brack, M. L. 2001a A Cultural Resources Assessment of Block 42 of Buell’s Addition, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 01-112. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2001b A Cultural Resources Evaluation of Four Construction Sites Associated with the Clearwell Transmission Main, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 01-104. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Ciolek-Torrello, Richard S. 1995 The Houghton Road Site, the Agua Caliente Phase, and the Early Formative Period in the Tucson Basin. Kiva 60(4):531–574.
1998 Early Farmers of the Sonoran Desert, Archaeological Investigations at the Houghton Road Site, Tucson, Arizona. Technical Series 72. Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson.
Clark, Jeff 1992 Archaeological Survey of the Chico Arroyo Reclaimed Water Transmission Main. Letter Report No. 92-123. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Collins, William S., Melanie Sturgeon, and Robert Carriker 1993 The United States Military in Arizona, 1846-1945. Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, Phoenix.
Cook, Patricia 2003 Cultural Resources Survey of Three Lots at South Park Avenue and East 24th Street, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 03-170. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 34
Crown, Patricia L. 1991 The Hohokam: Current Views of Prehistory and the Regional System. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the Southwest, edited by Patricia L. Crown and W. James Judge, pp. 135–157. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Crown, Patricia L., and W. James Judge 1991 Synthesis and Conclusions. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the Southwest, edited by Patricia L. Crown and W. James Judge, pp. 293–308. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Diehl, Allison Cohen 1998 Archaeological Survey of the Intersection of Broadway Boulevard and Park Avenue, Tucson, Arizona. Letter Report No. 98-202. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1999a An Archaeological Survey of a Parcel at the Intersection of Fairmount Street and Catalina Avenue, Tucson, Arizona. Letter Report No. 99-126. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1999b Cultural Resources Survey for the CAP Transmission Main Access/Pumping Manhole Improvements, Tucson, Arizona. Technical Report No. 99-183. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1999c Cultural Resource Survey of a Proposed Well Site near Campbell Avenue and Eighth Street, Tucson, Arizona. Project Report No. 99-188. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2001a Cultural Resources Survey for the Thirty-Sixth Street Housing Project, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 01-118. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2001b Cultural Resources Survey of Fourteen Properties for the Hope IV South Park Revitalization Project, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 01-136. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2002a A Cultural Resources Survey of Plumer Avenue between Sylvosa and 36th Streets, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 02-125. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2002b A Cultural Resources Survey of 25th Street between 7th and 9th Avenues and an alley between 9th and 10th Avenues, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 02- 124. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2002c Cultural Resources Assessment of a Parcel Located on 28th Street Between Curtis Avenue and Vine Avenue, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 02-165. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2002d Cultural Resources Survey for the Proposed South Park Back to Basics Project, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 02-160. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 35
2002e Cultural Resources Survey of a Parcel Located at the Intersection of 35th Street and Freemont Avenue, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 02-157. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2002f Cultural Resources Survey on 17th and 18th Streets Between Park and Plumer Avenues, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 02-178. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003a Cultural Resources Survey for the Corrosion Prevention Project, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 04-118. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003b Cultural Resources Survey for the 3rd Avenue Manhole Project, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 03-212. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003c Cultural Resources Survey of a Parcel at 316 East 25th Street in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 03-120. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003d Cultural Resources Survey of a Parcel on 30th Street between Euclid and Park Avenues, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 03-185. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003e Cultural Resources Survey of Four Locations on Broadway Boulevard and 5th Street in Tucson, Pima County Arizona. Technical Report No. 02-123. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003f Cultural Resources Survey of Parcels at 1226 East 32nd Street and 1200 East 35th Street, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 03-167. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2003g Cultural Resources Survey of Two Lots on East 36th Street, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 003-166. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
2004 Cultural Resources Survey for the Euclid-Park Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge at Aviation Parkway, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Project Report No. 04-126. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Doak, David P. 1999a Addendum to An Archaeological Survey in Support of Permitting for a Proposed Fiber Optic Line from Phoenix, Arizona, to the Arizona/New Mexico State Line. Cultural Resource Report No. 99-72. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson.
1999b An Archaeological Survey in Support of Permitting for a Proposed Fiber Optic Line from Phoenix, Arizona, to the Arizona/New Mexico State Line. Cultural Resource Report No. 99-72. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson.
1999c Archaeological Survey for a Proposed Fiber Optic Cable Line from Yuma to Phoenix, Arizona. Cultural Resource Report No. 99-185. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 36
1999d Archaeological Survey of the Vail Work Around Portion of a Proposed Fiber Optic Line, Phoenix to the Arizona/New Mexico State Line (Addendum). Addendum to Cultural Resource Report No. 99-72. SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson.
2003 A Cultural Resource Assessment of a Historical Ice House in Tucson, Arizona. Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2003-37. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Tucson.
2004 The Sinclair Property Survey: A Class III Cultural Resource Survey of a 32-Acre Parcel in Tucson, Arizona, the Former Site of the Fiesta Drive-In Theater. Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2004-93. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Tucson.
2005 The Sinclair II Survey: A Class III Cultural Resource Survey of a 317- Acre Parcel in Tucson, Arizona, The Former Site of the Tucson Downtown Airport. Tierra Archaeological Report No.2 004-85. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Tucson.
Doelle, William Harper 1985 Excavations at the Valencia Site, a Preclassic Hohokam Village in the Southern Tucson Basin. Anthropological Papers 3. Institute for American Research, Tucson.
Doelle, William H., and Henry D. Wallace 1990 The Transition to History in Pimería Alta. In Perspectives on Southwestern Prehistory, edited by P. E. Minnis and C. L. Redman, pp. 239–257. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
1991 The Changing Role of the Tucson Basin in the Hohokam Regional System. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, edited by George J. Gumerman, pp. 279–345. New World Studies Series No. 1. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona.
Doyel, David E. 1991a Hohokam Cultural Evolution in the Phoenix Basin. In Exploring the Hohokam: Prehistoric Desert Peoples of the American Southwest, edited by George J. Gumerman, pp. 231–278. New World Studies Series No. 1. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona.
1991b Hohokam Exchange and Interaction. In Chaco and Hohokam: Prehistoric Regional Systems in the Southwest, edited by Patricia L. Crown and W. James Judge, pp. 225– 252. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
2000 In Pursuit of the Salado in the Sonoran Desert. In Salado, edited by Jeffrey S. Dean, pp. 295–314. New World Studies Series No. 4. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona; University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Elson, Mark D., Miriam T. Stark, and David A. Gregory 2000 Tonto Basin Local Systems: Implications for Cultural Affiliation and Migration. In Salado, edited by Jeffrey S. Dean. New World Studies Series No. 4. The Amerind Foundation, Dragoon, Arizona; University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 37
Eppley, Lisa G. 1997a An Archaeological Survey for Broadway-Campbell Main Replacement Project. Letter Report No. 97-114. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1997b An Archaeological Survey for Kino-Silverlake Main Replacement Project. Letter Report No. 97-111. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1997c An Archaeological Survey for the Broadway-Campbell Main Replacement Project. Letter Report No. 97-113. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1997d An Archaeological Survey for the Well Connection and Meadows Reclaimed Water Project. Letter Report No. 97-104. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1997e Archaeological Survey of the Kino Community Center Reclaimed Water Main Project. Letter Report No. 97-103. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1999a Archaeological Survey for the Valencia-Country Club Piping Modification Project. Technical Report No. 99-133, Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
1999b Archaeological Survey for 22nd Street and Randolph Way Signalization Project. Technical Report No. 99-138. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Euler, Thomas R. 1987 An Archaeological Clearance Survey of the Proposed Central Arizona Project East, Phase I Design Water Pipeline Alignment, Pima County, Arizona. Letter Report on file, Archaeological Records Office. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Fahrni, Grant 2003a A Class III Archaeological Survey along a 0.7-mile Segment of Highland Avenue from Sixth Street to Arroyo Chico, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Harris Environmental Group, Tucson.
2003b Addendum to A Class III Archaeological Survey along a 0.7-mile Segment of Highland Avenue from Sixth Street to Arroyo Chico, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Letter Report to Marty McCune, City of Tucson. Harris Environmental Group, Tucson.
Faught, Michael K., and Andrea K. L. Freeman 1998 Paleoindian Complexes of the Terminal Wisconsin and Early Holocene. In Paleoindian and Archaic Sites in Arizona. Technical Report No. 97-7. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.
Fish, Suzanne K., Paul R. Fish, and John Madsen (editors) 1992 The Marana Community in the Hohokam World. Anthropological Papers No. 56. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 38
Gregory, David A. (editor) 1999 Excavations in the Santa Cruz River Floodplain: The Middle Archaic Component at Los Pozos. Anthropological Papers No. 20. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.
Hall, Susan D. 2004 Cultural Resources Survey for the Sidewalk Program, Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Technical Report No. 04-167. Desert Archaeology, Inc., Tucson.
Hamlin, Jenna 2006 A Cultural Resources Assessment of the Proposed Broadway Strip Mall and TEP Cellular Tower Site (PH35213E), Located at 2545 East Broadway Boulevard in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona. Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2006-43. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Tucson.
Haury, Emil W. 1950 The Stratigraphy and Archaeology of Ventana Cave. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
1976 The Hohokam: Desert Farmers and Craftsmen. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Heidke, James M. 2003 Tortolita Phase Ceramics. In Roots of Sedentism: Archaeological Excavations at Valencia Vieja, a Founding Village in the Tucson Basin of Southern Arizona, edited by Henry D. Wallace, pp. 145–191. Anthropological Papers No. 29. Center for Desert Archaeology, Tucson.
Hendricks, David M. 1985 Arizona Soils. Centennial Publication. College of Agriculture, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Holzkamper, F. M., and J. McConville n.d. Field notes of an Archaeological Survey of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. Arizona State Museum Archives, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Huckell, Bruce B. 1995 Of Marshes and Maize: Preceramic Agricultural Settlements in the Cienega Valley, Southeastern Arizona. Anthropological Papers No. 59. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
1996 The Archaic Prehistory of the North American Southwest. Journal of World Prehistory (10):305–373.
Hushour, Jennifer 2008 City Project 08-05, DeMeester Outdoor Performance Center Improvements Survey. Letter Report No. 2008-60. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Tucson
Tierra Archaeological Report No. 2009-83 39
Jones, Jeffrey T., and Allen Dart 2002 Cultural Resources Survey of a Proposed Water Main Replacement Corridor along Plumer Avenue and 22nd Street in Tucson, Arizona. Letter Report No.2002.012. Old Pueblo Archaeology Center, Tucson.
Justice, Noel D. 2002 Stone Age Spear and Arrow Points of the Southwestern United States. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
Kelley, J. Charles 1991 The Known Archaeological Ballcourts of Durango and Zacatecas, Mexico. In The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David