No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 2022-0008; MARTIN RESIDENCE; CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY - OCTOBER 7 2021; 2021-10-07 CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR THE MARTIN RESIDENCE PROJECT CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APN 155-221-05; PRE-2021-0030 (DEV2021-0153) Submitted to: City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Prepared for: New Modern Design 143 S. Cedros Ave. #B203 Solana Beach, California 92075 Prepared by: Brian F. Smith, M.A., Consulting Archaeologist Brian F. Smith and Associates 14010 Poway Road, Suite A Poway, California 92064 October 7, 2021 Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– ii Archaeological Database Information Author(s): Tracy A Stropes M.A. RPA and Brian F. Smith, M.A., Consulting Archaeologist Consulting Firm: Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road Poway, California 92064 (858) 679-8218 Report Date: October 7, 2021 Report Title: Cultural Resources Survey Report for The Martin Residence Project (APN 155-221-05; PRE-2021-0030 [DEV2021-0153]), City of Carlsbad, California Submitted to: City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Prepared for: New Modern Design 143 S. Cedros Ave. #B203 Solana Beach, California 92075 USGS Quadrangle: Section 1, Township 12 South, Range 5 West, of the San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian on the USGS San Luis Rey, California (7.5 minute) topographic quadrangle map. Key Words: Archaeological Survey; SDI-627; City of Carlsbad; USGS San Luis Rey, California Quadrangle (7.5 minute); marine shell; not significant; monitoring recommended. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– iii Table of Contents Page 1.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT .............................................................1.0–1 2.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................2.0–1 3.0 PROJECT SETTING ...................................................................................................3.0–1 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ..........................................................................3.0–1 3.1.1 Geology .......................................................................................................3.0–1 3.1.2 Soils .............................................................................................................3.0–2 3.1.3 Biology ........................................................................................................3.0–2 3.2 CULTURAL SETTING ........................................................................................3.0–2 3.2.1 The San Dieguito Complex/Paleo Indian ...................................................3.0–2 3.2.2 La Jolla Complex/Encinitas Tradition/Milling Stone Horizon ...................3.0–3 3.2.3 Late Prehistoric Period...............................................................................3.0–5 4.0 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................4.0–1 4.1 Archaeological Records Search ............................................................................4.0–1 4.2 Field Methodology ................................................................................................4.0–1 4.3 Report Preparation and Recordation .....................................................................4.0–1 4.4 Native American Consutation ...............................................................................4.0–2 4.5 Applicable Regulations .........................................................................................4.0–2 4.5.1 California Enviornmental Quality Act ........................................................4.0–2 5.0 RESULTS .....................................................................................................................5.0–1 5.1 Records Search Results .........................................................................................5.0–1 5.2 Field Investigation .................................................................................................5.0–2 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................6.0–1 7.0 CERTIFICATION ........................................................................................................7.0–1 8.0 REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................8.0–1 Appendices Appendix A – Personnel Qualifications Appendix B – Archaeologiocal Records Search* Appendix C – NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results* Appendix D – Confidential Maps* *Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– iv List of Figures Page Figure 2.0–1 General Location Map .................................................................................2.0–2 Figure 2.0–2 Project Location Map ...................................................................................2.0–3 Figure 2.0–3 Site Plan .......................................................................................................2.0–4 Figure 5.2–1 Cultural Resource Location Map* ...............................................................5.0–5 *Deleted for public review and bound separately in the Confidential Appendix List of Tables Page Table 5.1–1 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites Within a One-Quarter-Mile Radius of the Project .................................................................................. 5.0–1 Table 5.1–2 Archaeological Studies Conducted Within Portions of the Project ........... 5.0–1 List of Plates Page Plate 5.2–1 Overview from the center of the property, facing south ..............................5.0–3 Plate 5.2–2 View of the concrete path, facing east .........................................................5.0–4 Plate 5.2–3 View of one of the shell fragments ..............................................................5.0–6 Plate 5.2–4 View of the second shell fragment...............................................................5.0–6 Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 1.0–1 1.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT In response to a request from New Modern Design, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) conducted a Phase I cultural resources survey of the Martin Residence Project (PRE-2021- 0030 [DEV2021-0153]) in the city of Carlsbad in northern San Diego County, California. The assessment was conducted as part of the environmental clearance required for the single-family housing development proposed for the subject property. The survey program was conducted in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15064.5, and the City of Carlsbad’s cultural resource guidelines to determine the presence of any archaeological or historic resources that would be affected by the proposed project and whether these resources meet the eligibility requirements for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). A records search was reviewed from the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at San Diego State University (SDSU) to identify previously discovered archaeological sites in the project area, and a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to list potentially sacred or ceremonial sites or landforms on or near the project. The records search was positive for the presence of one previously recorded cultural resource (SDI-627) within the project boundaries, and two previously recorded cultural resources were identified within one-quarter mile of the project. The NAHC SLF results have not yet been received as of the date of this report (see Appendix C). Senior Archaeologist Tracy A. Stropes, M.A., RPA conducted the archaeological survey of the project on October 5, 2021 with assistance from Cami Mojado, a San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Native American monitor from Saving Sacred Sites. The subject property is an undeveloped lot on the southeastern edge of Buena Vista Lagoon, immediately west of the intersection of Buena Vista Circle and South Buena Vista Circle. The property has been disked and leveled in the past and appears to have been previously graded. Aerial photographs from between 1938 and 1980 demonstrate that between those years, the entire area including and surrounding the project area, have been impacted by past development. Site SDI-627 was initially recorded in 1958 (Wallace 1958) within the project boundary. The current archaeological survey did not identify any substantial remaining evidence of the resource within the project area. It is likely that the previous grading of the property after 1958 has removed any evidence of the recorded site previously identified within the project area, except for two small shell fragments noted during the site inspection. Due to the disturbed condition of the property and the minimal evidence of archaeological Site SDI-627 observed, the portion of Site SDI-627 recorded within the subject property is considered non-significant and lacking the level of integrity necessary to be considered eligible for the CRHR. Therefore, this portion of the site is considered to be not significant according to CEQA and City of Carlsbad guidelines. The proposed project will affect the recorded location of Site SDI-627, however, the impacts will not be significantly adverse. For this reason, no further study is proposed. However, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist and Native Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 1.0–2 American representative be present for all earthmoving activities to facilitate the identification and review of any subsurface cultural resources that may be potentially exposed during grading. A copy of this report will be permanently filed with the SCIC at SDSU. All notes and other materials related to this project will be curated at the archaeological laboratory of BFSA in Poway, California. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 2.0–1 2.0 INTRODUCTION BFSA conducted the Phase I cultural resources survey for the Martin Residence Project in response to a requirement by the City of Carlsbad for the environmental assessment of a proposed construction of a single-family residence in conformance with CEQA and the City’s environmental guidelines. The project is situated on the southeastern edge of Buena Vista Lagoon, immediately west of the intersection of Buena Vista Circle and South Buena Vista Circle in the northwestern portion of the city of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California (Figure 2.0–1). The project includes Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 155-221-05 and is situated within Section 1, Township 12 South, Range 5 West, of the San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian, as shown on the USGS San Luis Rey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 2.0–2). The project proposes to develop the 0.6-acre lot into a single-family residence with associated landscaping and infrastructure (Figure 2.0–3). The decision to request this investigation was based upon cultural resource sensitivity of the locality, as suggested by known site density and predictive modeling. Sensitivity for cultural resources in a given area is usually indicated by known settlement patterns, which in the Carlsbad area are focused around freshwater resources and a food supply. An archaeological records search for the project was conducted at the SCIC at SDSU, which reported that three cultural resources have been previously recorded within one mile of the project, one of which (SDI-627) overlaps the project boundaries. Four previous cultural resource studies have been conducted within one- quarter mile of the project. None of these studies included the current project area. The records search results are discussed in detail in Section 5.1. Principal Investigator Brian F. Smith, M.A. directed the cultural resources study for the project, and Senior Archaeologist Tracy A. Stropes, M.A., RPA completed the pedestrian survey on October 5, 2021 with the assistance of Cami Mojado, a San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Native American monitor from Saving Sacred Sites. The survey was conducted by walking transects in approximately three-meter intervals. The only evidence of SDI-627 observed during the survey was two marine shell fragments. No other evidence of the previously recorded resource was identified on the property. Based upon the results of the survey and background research for the project, the study has concluded that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) should be implemented for the project in order to mitigate the project’s potential impacts to masked or buried elements of SDI-627 (see Section 6.0). Brian F. Smith and Tracy A. Stropes prepared the technical report, Tracy A. Stropes prepared the graphics, and Summer Forsman conducted technical editing and report production. Qualifications of key personnel are provided in Appendix A. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–1 3.0 PROJECT SETTING The project setting consists of the natural physical, geological, and biological contexts within the proposed Martin Residence Project, as well as the cultural setting of prehistoric human activities in the region. The following sections discuss both the environmental and cultural settings of the subject property, the relationship between the two, and the relevance of that relationship to the current project. 3.1 Environmental Setting 3.1.1 Geology The Martin Residence Project is located on the southeastern shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon area in northwestern Carlsbad in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County. The project’s elevations range from approximately 15 to 45 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). San Diego County lies in the Peninsular Ranges Geologic Province of southern California. The mountainous zone, which extends from northwest to southeast through the county, ranges to a maximum height of 6,533 AMSL (Beauchamp 1986). Foothills and valleys, which comprise the cismontane region, extend west from the mountains. This region typically receives more rainfall than the mesas and less than the mountainous region. Between the foothills and the coast lies the coastal mesa region, which is cut by several large drainages originating in the mountains and foothills. The coast is characterized by large bays and lagoons, where the major rivers empty into the sea, and mesas, which terminate at the ocean in the form of bluffs (Beauchamp 1986). During the late Holocene, the eastern extent of the lagoon was most likely characterized by shallow saltwater marsh and mud flats. However, several millennia ago, the lagoon was considerably deeper and provided different habitat. The lagoon was created as the sea level rose rapidly following the last glacial sequence, filling a deep canyon cut by Hedionda Creek during a long period of lower sea levels. The deeply entrenched lagoon provided a variety of marine food resources (e.g., mollusks, crustaceans, and fishes) used in the subsistence routine of early and middle Holocene La Jolla Complex peoples. Evidence from Batiquitos Lagoon, south of Agua Hedionda, indicates that approximately 3,500 years before the present (YBP), a rapid, cataclysmic sedimentation event occurred that closed the lagoon off to the coast and significantly altered the lagoon environment (Gallegos 1992; Masters et al. 1988; Miller 1966). The event was followed by a stabilization of sea levels and then development of sand bars, sand flats, and mud flats within the lagoons along the central San Diego County coast. The sedimentation process resulted in the decline of mollusk populations, particularly Pectinids, which greatly reduced human activity in the area. Decline in occupancy of the Batiquitos Lagoon area following the siltation event is evidenced by the paucity of sites post-dating 3,500 YBP (Gallegos 1987). Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–2 3.1.2 Soils Soils in the area fall within the Marina-Chesterton Association, characterized by somewhat excessively drained to moderately well-drained, loamy, coarse sands and fine sandy loams (Bowman et al. 1973). Soil within the project is the Marina loamy coarse sand (MIE) found on moderate to heavy slopes and formed from feruginous eolian sand (Bowman et al. 1973: Sheet 22, pp. 65); the soil is characterized as moderately to heavily eroded. 3.1.3 Biology The current biological setting of the project is characterized by non-native grasses. The majority of the property has been graded; however, vegetation across the lot has been disturbed in the past. The prehistoric biological community was dominated by a coastal sage scrub ecosystem, which included sage shrubs and a variety of grasses and cacti. A diversity of faunal resources was available in the surrounding ecosystem including deer (Odocoileus hemionus), Leporids (Lepus and Sylvilagus), and a variety of waterfowl, rodents, and reptiles. 3.2 Cultural Setting San Diego County has a very rich and extensive record of prehistoric activity. The recognized archaeological time periods include the San Dieguito Complex/Paleo Indian, the Milling Stone Horizon, La Jolla Complex, and the Late Prehistoric (Luiseño and Kumeyaay) Period. The following subsections provide a discussion of these cultural elements within the region of the current project. 3.2.1 The San Dieguito Complex/Paleo Indian The term “San Dieguito Complex” is a cultural distinction used to describe a group of people that occupied sites in the region between 11,500 and 7,000 YBP and appear to have been related to or were contemporaneous with the Paleo Indian groups in the Great Basin area and the Midwest. Initially believed to have been big game hunters, the San Dieguito are better typified as wide-ranging hunter gatherers. The earliest evidence of the San Dieguito Complex sites is known from San Diego County, the Colorado Desert, and farther north along the California coast. These people abandoned the drying inland lakes of the present California desert and arrived in San Diego County circa 9,000 YBP, as documented at the Harris Site (SDI-149) (Warren 1966), Rancho Park North Site (SDI-4392) (Kaldenberg 1982), and Agua Hedionda sites (SDI-210/UCLJ-M-15 and SDI-10,965/SDM-W-131) (Moriarty 1967; Gallegos and Carrico 1984; Gallegos 1991). A San Dieguito component appears to have been present in the lower strata at the Malago Cove site in Redondo Beach, in Los Angeles County (Walker 1951). Although radiocarbon dates were not obtained from these levels, the lack of ground stone tools and presence of crude flaked tools suggests similarities to the San Dieguito Complex. Diagnostic San Dieguito artifacts include finely crafted scraper planes, choppers, scrapers, crescentics, elongated bifacial knives, and intricate leaf-shaped points (Rogers 1939; Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–3 Warren 1967). This tool assemblage resembles those of the Western Lithic Co-Tradition (Davis et al. 1969) and the Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition (Bedwell 1970; Moratto 1984). Typical San Dieguito sites lack ground stone tools. Tools recovered from San Dieguito Complex sites and the pattern of the site locations indicate that they were a wandering hunting and gathering society (Moriarty 1969; Rogers 1966). Faunal data from the Malago Cove site, which included mollusks, fish, birds, and terrestrial and marine mammals, suggests a diverse and broad-based strategy (Walker 1951). The San Dieguito Complex is the least understood of the cultures that occupied the southern California region. This is primarily due to the fact that San Dieguito sites rarely contain stratigraphic information or datable material. Debate continues as to whether the San Dieguito sites are actually different activity areas of the early Encinitas Tradition peoples (Bull 1987; Gallegos 1987), or whether the San Dieguito Complex peoples had a separate origin and culture from the Encinitas Tradition (Hayden 1987; Moriarty 1987; Smith 1987). According to the second scenario, the San Dieguito Complex peoples may have been assimilated into the dominant Encinitas Tradition culture (Kaldenberg 1982; Moriarty 1967). A third possibility is that the San Dieguito Complex gave rise to the Encinitas Tradition (Koerper et al. 1991). The issue of shared or separate origins of the San Dieguito Complex and Encinitas Tradition may be resolved with continued collection of archaeological data and collection of systematic radiocarbon dates. 3.2.2 The La Jolla Complex/Encinitas Tradition/Milling Stone Horizon Between 9,000 and 8,000 YBP, a widespread complex was established in the southern California region, primarily along the coast (Warren and True 1961). The complex is locally known as the La Jolla Complex (Rogers 1939; Moriarty 1966), which is regionally associated with the Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968), and shared cultural components with the widespread Milling Stone Horizon (Wallace 1955). The coastal expression of the La Jolla Complex, with a focus on coastal resources and development of deeply stratified shell middens located primarily around bays and lagoons, appeared in the southern California coastal areas, where the older sites associated with the expression are located at Topanga Canyon, Newport Bay, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and some of the Channel Islands. Radiocarbon dates from sites attributed to this complex span a period of more than 7,000 years in the region, beginning over 9,000 YBP. The Encinitas Tradition is best recognized for its pattern of large coastal sites characterized by shell middens, grinding tools closely associated with the marine resources of the area, cobble-based tools, and flexed human burials (Shumway et al. 1961; Smith and Moriarty 1985). While ground stone tools and scrapers are the most recognized tool types, coastal Encinitas Tradition sites also contain numerous utilized flakes, which may have been used to pry open shellfish. Artifact assemblages at coastal sites indicate a subsistence pattern focused on shellfish collection and near-shore fishing, suggesting an incipient maritime adaptation with regional similarities to more northern sites of the same period (Koerper et al. 1986). Other Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–4 artifacts associated with Encinitas Tradition sites include stone bowls, doughnut stones, discoidals, stone balls, and stone, bone, and shell beads. The coastal lagoons in northwestern San Diego County supported large Milling Stone Horizon populations circa 6,000 YBP, as demonstrated by numerous radiocarbon dates from the many sites adjacent to the lagoons. The ensuing millennia were not stable environmentally, and by 3,000 YBP, many of the coastal sites in central San Diego County had been abandoned (Gallegos 1987, 1992), which is usually attributed to the sedimentation of coastal lagoons and the resulting deterioration of fish and mollusk habitat, a situation well-documented at Batiquitos Lagoon (Miller 1966; Gallegos 1987). Over a two-thousand-year period at Batiquitos Lagoon, dominant mollusk species occurring in archaeological middens shifted from deep-water mollusks (Argopecten sp.) to species tolerant of tidal flat conditions (Chione sp.), indicating water depth and temperature changes (Miller 1966; Gallegos 1987). This situation likely occurred for other small drainages (Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, San Marcos, and Escondido creeks) along the central San Diego coast, where low flow rates did not produce sufficient discharge to flush the lagoons they fed (Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, Batiquitos, and San Elijo lagoons) (Byrd 1998). Drainages along the northern and southern San Diego coastline were larger and flushed the coastal hydrological features they fed, keeping them open to the ocean and allowing for continued human exploitation (Byrd 1998). Los Peñasquitos Lagoon and Sorrento Valley exhibit dates as late as 2,355 YBP (Smith and Moriarty 1985; Carrico and Taylor 1983; Carrico and Gallegos 1988; Gallegos et al. 1989; Smith and Moriarty 1983; WESTEC 1975). San Diego Bay showed continuous occupation until the close of the Milling Stone Horizon (Gallegos et al. 1988). Additionally, data from several drainages in Camp Pendleton indicate a continued occupation of shell midden sites until the close of the period, indicating that coastal sites were not entirely abandoned during this time (Byrd 1998). By 5,000 YBP, an inland expression of the La Jolla Complex, which exhibits influences from the Campbell Tradition from the north, is evident in the archaeological record. These inland Milling Stone Horizon sites have been termed “Pauma Complex” (True 1958; Warren et al. 1961; Meighan 1954). By definition, Pauma Complex sites share a predominance of grinding implements (manos and metates), lack mollusk remains, have a greater tool variety including atl- atl dart points, quarry-based tools, and crescentics, and seem to express a more sedentary lifestyle with a subsistence economy based upon the use of a broad variety of terrestrial resources. Although originally viewed as a separate culture from the coastal La Jolla Complex (True 1980), it appears that these inland sites may be part of a subsistence and settlement system used by the coastal peoples. Evidence from the 4S Ranch Project in inland San Diego County suggests that these inland sites may represent seasonal components within an annual subsistence round by La Jolla Complex populations (Raven-Jennings et al.1996), so including both coastal and inland sites of this time period in discussions of the Encinitas Tradition provides a more a complete appraisal of the settlement and subsistence system exhibited by this cultural complex. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–5 3.2.3 The Late Prehistoric Period Approximately 1,300 YBP, a Shoshonean-speaking group from the Great Basin region moved into San Diego County, marking the transition to the Late Prehistoric Period. The period is characterized by higher population densities and elaborations in social, political, and technological systems. Economic systems diversified and intensified with the continued elaboration of trade networks, the use of shell-bead currency, and the appearance of more labor- intensive, yet effective, technological innovations. Technological developments during the period include the introduction of the bow and arrow between A.D. 400 and 600. Atl-atl darts were replaced by smaller arrow darts, including the Cottonwood series points. Other hallmarks of the Late Prehistoric Period include extensive trade networks as far reaching as the Colorado River Basin and cremation of the dead. The period is divided into two phases, San Luis Rey I and San Luis Rey II, based upon the introduction of pottery (Meighan 1954). Through radiocarbon dating, the introduction of pottery and the initiation of the San Luis Rey II phase began at approximately A.D. 1300. San Luis Rey I is characterized by the use of portable shaped or unshaped slab metates and non-portable bedrock milling features. Manos and pestles may also be shaped or unshaped. Cremations, bone awls, and stone and shell ornaments are also prominent in the material culture. The later San Luis Rey II assemblage is augmented by pottery cooking and storage vessels, cremation urns, and polychrome pictographs. The fluorescence of rock art likely appeared as the result of increased population sizes and increased sedentism (True et al. 1974). Flaked stone dart points are dominated by the Cottonwood Triangular series, but Desert Side-notched, Dos Cabazas Serrated, leaf-shaped, and stemmed styles also occur. Subsistence is thought to have been focused upon the use of acorns, a storable species that allowed for relative sedentism and increased population sizes. Ethnohistoric and ethnographic evidence indicates that the Shoshonean-speaking group that occupied the northern portion of San Diego County was the Luiseño. Along the coast, the Luiseño made use of the marine resources by fishing and collecting mollusks for food. Seasonally available terrestrial resources, including acorns and game, were also sources of nourishment for Luiseño groups. The elaborate kinship and clan systems between the Luiseño and other groups facilitated a wide-reaching trade network that included trade of Obsidian Butte obsidian, resources from the eastern deserts, and steatite from the Channel Islands. When contacted by the Spanish in the sixteenth century, the Luiseño occupied a territory bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by the Peninsular Range mountains (including Palomar Mountain to the south and Santiago Peak to the north), on the south by Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and on the north by Aliso Creek in present-day San Juan Capistrano. The Luiseño were a Takic-speaking people more closely related linguistically and ethnographically to the Cahuilla, Gabrielino, and Cupeño to the north and east than to the Kumeyaay, a Yuman- speaking group, who occupied territory to the south. The Luiseño differed from their neighboring Takic speakers in having an extensive proliferation of social statuses, a system of ruling families that provided ethnic cohesion within the territory, a distinct world view that Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–6 stemmed from use of the hallucinogen datura, and an elaborate religion that included ritualized sand paintings of the sacred being “Chingichngish” (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). The following is a summary of ethnographic data regarding this group. Subsistence and Settlement The Luiseño occupied sedentary villages, most often located in sheltered areas in valley bottoms, along streams, or along coastal strands near mountain ranges. Villages were located near water sources to facilitate acorn leaching and in areas that offered thermal and defensive protection. Villages were composed of areas that were both publicly and privately (or family) owned. Publicly owned areas included trails, temporary campsites, hunting areas, and quarry sites. Inland groups had fishing and gathering sites along the coast that were used, particularly from January to March, when inland food resources were scarce. During October and November, most of the village would relocate to mountain oak groves to harvest acorns. For the remainder of the year, the Luiseño remained at village sites, where food resources were within a day’s travel (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). The most important food source of the Luiseño was acorns, of which six different species were used (Quercus californica, Quercus agrifolia, Quercus chrysolepis, Quercus dumosa, Quercus engelmanni, and Quercus wizlizeni). Seeds, particularly of grasses (Gramineae), composits (Compositae), and mints (Labiatae), were also heavily used. Seed-bearing species were encouraged through controlled burns, which were conducted at least every third year, and a variety of other stems, leaves, shoots, bulbs, roots, and fruits were also utilized. Hunting augmented the vegetal diet. Animal species taken included deer (Odocoileus hemionus), rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), hare (Lepus californicus), woodrat (Neotoma sp.), ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), antelope (Antilicapra americana), quail (Callipelpa californica and Oreortyx pictus), duck (Anatidae), freshwater fish from mountain streams, and marine mammals, fish, crustaceans, and mollusks, particularly abalone (Haliotis sp.), from the coast. A variety of snakes, small birds, and rodents were also taken (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Social Organization Social groups within the Luiseño nation consisted of patrilineal families or clans, which were politically and economically autonomous. Several clans comprised a religious party, or nota, which was headed by a chief who organized religious ceremonies and controlled economics and warfare. The chief had assistants who specialized in particular aspects of ceremonial or environmental knowledge, and who, with the chief, were part of a cultic social group with special access to supernatural power, particularly that of Chingichngish. The positions of chief and assistants were hereditary, and the complexity and multiplicity of these specialists’ roles likely increased in coastal villages and larger inland villages (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976; Strong 1929). Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–7 Marriages were arranged by the parents; these arrangements were often made to forge alliances between lineages. Useful alliances included those between groups of differing ecological niches, and those that resulted in territorial expansion. Residence was patrilocal (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Women were primarily responsible for plant gathering while men were responsible for hunting, although, at times, particularly during acorn and marine mollusk harvests, there was no division of labor. Elderly women cared for children, while elderly men were active participants in rituals, ceremonies, and political affairs and were responsible for manufacturing, hunting and ritualistic implements. Children were taught subsistence skills at the earliest age possible (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Material Culture House structures were conical, partially subterranean, and thatched with reeds, brush, or bark. Ramadas were rectangular-shaped and protected workplaces for domestic chores, including cooking. Ceremonial sweathouses, which were important in purification rituals, were round, partially subterranean thatched structures covered with a layer of mud. Another ceremonial structure was the wámkis, which was located in the center of the village and was the place of rituals such as sand painting and associated with the Chingichngish cult (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Clothing was minimal. Women wore a cedar-bark and netted twine double apron and men a waist cord. In cold weather, cloaks or robes of rabbit fur, deerskin, or sea otter fur were worn by both sexes. Footwear included sandals fashioned from yucca fibers and deerskin moccasins. Adornments included bead necklaces and pendants made from bone, clay, stone, shell, bear claws, mica sheets, deer hooves, and abalone shell. Men wore ear and nose piercings made of cane or bone, which were sometimes decorated with beads. Adornments were commonly decorated with semiprecious stones including quartz, topaz, garnet, opal, opalite, agate, and jasper (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Hunting implements included the bow and arrow. Arrows were tipped with either a carved, fire-hardened wooden tip or a lithic point, usually fashioned from locally available felsite or quartz. Throwing sticks fashioned from wood were used in hunting small game, while deer head decoys were used during deer hunts. Coastal groups fashioned dugout canoes for near- shore fishing and harvested fish with seines, nets, traps, and hooks made of bone or abalone shell (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). The Luiseño had a well-developed basket industry; baskets were used in resource gathering, food preparation, storage, and food serving. Pottery containers, which were shaped by paddle and anvil and fired in shallow open pits, were used for food storage, cooking, and serving. Other utensils included wooden implements, steatite bowls, and ground stone manos, metates, mortars, and pestles (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Tools included knives, scrapers, Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 3.0–8 choppers, awls, and drills. Shamanistic items included soapstone or clay smoking pipes, and crystals made of quartz or tourmaline (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1976). Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 4.0–1 4.0 METHODOLOGY The Phase I cultural resource survey of the Martin Residence Project consisted of institutional records searches, a pedestrian archaeological survey of the project, and preparation of this report. This study was conducted in conformance with City of Carlsbad guidelines and CEQA, Section 15064.5 criteria. Specific definitions for archaeological resource type(s) used in this report are those established by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO 1995). The report format follows the Archaeological Resource Management Report guidelines. The results of the assessment are discussed in detail in Section 5.0. 4.1 Archaeological Records Search BFSA requested a records search from the SCIC at SDSU for an area of one-quarter mile surrounding the project in order to determine the presence of any previously recorded archaeological sites. The complete results of the records search are provided in Appendix B and discussed in Section 5.1. The SCIC search also included a standard review of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD). Land patent records, held by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and accessible through the BLM General Land Office website, were also reviewed for pertinent project information. In addition, the BFSA research library was consulted for any relevant historical information. 4.2 Field Methodology BFSA Senior Archaeologist Tracy A. Stropes, M.A., RPA conducted the survey of the Martin Residence Project on October 5, 2021 with the assistance of Cami Mojado, a San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Native American monitor from Saving Sacred Sites. Parallel survey transects spaced at approximately three-meter intervals were utilized throughout the entire project and photographs were taken to document project conditions (see Section 5.2). The topography of the project was noted as generally flat. In general, the subject property has been impacted by grading and the surrounding developments. 4.3 Report Preparation and Recordation This report contains information regarding previous studies, statutory requirements for the project, a brief description of the setting, research methods employed, and the overall results of the survey. The report includes all appropriate illustrations and tabular information needed to make a complete and comprehensive presentation of these activities, including the methodologies employed and the personnel involved. A copy of this report will be placed at the SCIC at SDSU. Any newly recorded sites or sites requiring updated information will be recorded on the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation site forms, which will be filed at the SCIC. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 4.0–2 4.4 Native American Consultation A request was made to the NAHC for a search of the Sacred Land Files to determine if the proposed project would affect any known Native American cultural resources. As of the date of this report, the NAHC response indicating the presence of sacred or ceremonial sites or landforms on or near the project have not been recevied. During the survey of the property, Cami Mojado from the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians was present to monitor the archaeological investigations. Documentation of correspondence may be found in Appendix C. 4.5 Applicable Regulations Resource importance is assigned to districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess exceptional value or quality illustrating or interpreting the heritage of Carlsbad in history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. Specifically, criteria outlined in CEQA provide the guidance for making such a determination. The following sections detail the criteria that a resource must meet in order to be determined important. 4.5.1 California Environmental Quality Act According to CEQA, (§15064.5a), the term “historical resource” includes the following: 1) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by, the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the CRHR (Public Resources Code [PRC] SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR. Section 4850 et seq.). 2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020.1(k) of the PRC or identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the PRC, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. 3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript, which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR (PRC SS5024.1, Title 14, Section 4852), including the following: a) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; b) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 4.0–3 c) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or d) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. 4) The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to Section 5020.1[k] of the PRC), or identified in a historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in Section 5024.1[g] of the PRC) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be a historical resource as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. According to CEQA, Section 15064.5(b), a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment. CEQA defines a substantial adverse change as: 1) Substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired. 2) The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project: a) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the CRHR; or b) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the PRC or its identification in a historical resources survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the PRC, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or, c) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA. Section 15064.5(c) of CEQA applies to effects upon archaeological sites and contains the following additional provisions regarding archaeological sites: Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 4.0–4 1. When a project will impact an archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is a historical resource, as defined in subsection (a). 2. If a lead agency determines that the archaeological site is a historical resource, it shall refer to the provisions of Section 21084.1 of the PRC, Section 15126.4 of the guidelines, and the limits contained in Section 21083.2 of the PRC do not apply. 3. If an archaeological site does not meet the criteria defined in subsection (a) but does meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource in Section 21083.2 of the PRC, the site shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 21083.2. The time and cost limitations described in PRC Section 21083.2(c-f) do not apply to surveys and site evaluation activities intended to determine whether the project location contains unique archaeological resources. 4. If an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor historical resource, the effects of the project upon those resources shall not be considered a significant effect upon the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect upon it are noted in the Initial Study or Environmental Impact Report, if one is prepared to address impacts upon other resources, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA process. Sections 15064.5(d) and (e) contain additional provisions regarding human remains. Regarding Native American human remains, paragraph (d) provides: (d) When an Initial Study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood of, Native American human remains within the project, the lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC, as provided in PRC SS5097.98. The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any items associated with Native American burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the NAHC. Action implementing such an agreement is exempt from: 1) The general prohibition on disinterring, disturbing, or removing human remains from any location other than a dedicated cemetery (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5). 2) The requirements of CEQA and the Coastal Act. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–1 5.0 RESULTS 5.1 Records Search Results An archaeological records search for the project and the surrounding area within a one- quarter-mile radius was conducted by BFSA at the SCIC at SDSU (Appendix B). The search results identified three cultural resources within one-quarter mile of the project, one of which (SDI- 627) was identified within the project boundaries (Table 5.1–1). Of the previously recorded resources, two are prehistoric and one is historic. The prehistoric sites include one camp site and one shell scatter. The historic resource includes a historic refuse deposit. Table 5.1–1 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites Within a One-Quarter-Mile Radius of the Project Site Number(s) Site Description SDI-627 Prehistoric camp site. SDI-8455 Prehistoric shell scatter. SDI-21,704 Historic refuse deposit. The results of the SCIC records search also indicate that four archaeological investigations have been conducted within a one-quarter-mile radius of the subject property, none of which directly included the subject property (Table 5.1–2). Table 5.1–2 Archaeological Studies Conducted Within Portions of the Project Byrd, Brian F. and Collin O’Neill 2002 Archaeological Survey Report for the Phase I Archaeological Survey Along Interstate 5 San Diego County, California. ASM, Inc. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Pallette, Drew 2003 Cultural Resources Study for The Proposed NCTD FAO Facility Project. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Rosen, Martin D. 1999 Historic Property Survey Report Oceanside to San Diego-Rail to Trail. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–2 Seeman, Larry 1982 Draft Environmental Impact Report Revised Parks and Recreation Element, Carlsbad, California. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Additionally, the following historic resources were also consulted, which did not indicate the presence of any additional resources within the project boundaries: • The NRHP index • The OHP Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility • The OHP BERD • 1938, 1947, 1953, 1964, 1967, 1978, and 1980 historic aerial photographs • 1942 Oceanside topographic map (1:62,500 scale) • 1948 San Luis Rey topographic map (7.5-minute) • 1968 San Luis Rey topographic map (7.5-minute) Lastly, a SLF search was requested from the NAHC to list potentially sacred or ceremonial sites or landforms on or near the project (Appendix C). As of the date of this report, the NAHC SLF results have not been received. BFSA reached out to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians and Cami Mojado participated in the archaeological survey of the Martin Residence Project on October 5, 2021. Ms. Mojado expressed concerns about the project due to its location along the southern bank of Buena Vista Lagoon and the presence of previously recorded resources within the project vicinity and wished to participate in any resulting monitoring program required by the lead agency. 5.2 Field Investigation The archaeological survey was completed on October 5, 2021 by Senior Archaeologist Tracy A. Stropes, M.A., RPA with participation by Cami Mojado from the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Aerial photographs, maps, and a mobile Trimble Global Positioning System unit permitted orientation and location of the project boundaries. The entire 0.6-acre property was surveyed by employing three-meter spaced transects. The surface of the site, including all exposed ground surfaces, rodent burrows, and disturbed areas, was carefully inspected. A survey form, field notes, and photographs documented the survey work undertaken. The topography of the project was noted as generally flat and previously graded (Plate 5.2‒ 1). Including the previous grading of the property, noted disturbances include road construction on the southern end of the project area, a cement path along the northern end of the property, and development of the surrounding properties (Plate 5.2‒2). The majority of the property was covered in sparse, low-lying grasses, resulting in good ground visibility. As indicated by the record search, Site SDI-627 was previously recorded by Wallace in 1958 as a prehistoric campsite that overlaps the current project (Figure 5.2‒1, see Appendix D). Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–3 At the time of the recordation, no artifacts or features were noted. The site had already been disturbed by residential development, and Wallace noted that the resource had been largely destroyed. In 2020, BFSA conducted archaeological monitoring south of the recorded location of SDI-627 for the nearby Laguna Drive Subdivision Project, located at 570 and 580 Laguna Drive in Carlsbad, California. The monitoring program resulted in the identification of disturbed portions of SDI-627 that identified 15 debitage, one adze, two manos, one ground stone fragment, and 3,385.7 grams of marine shell. It is unclear if elements of the resource were ever contained within the current project area or if Wallace mis-mapped the site in 1958. Despite this, due to the previous impacts over the last 63 years since the site’s initial recordation, only two small fragments of shell from Site SDI-627 were identified during the survey (Plate 5.2‒3 and 5.2–4). The two fragments of shell were identified along the southern portion of the property where the limits of the property meet the road at Buena Vista Circle. The shell was too weathered and small to be identified as to species. No other elements of the site were identified within the boundary of the property. Because of the absence of artifacts, the minimal amount of ecofacts, and the previous grading of the property, the site is evaluated as lacking any research potential. In accordance with the criteria listed in CEQA, Section 15064.5, and City of Carlsbad guidelines, this portion of Site SDI-627 does not qualify as a significant cultural resource. Plate 5.2–1: Overview from the center of the property, facing south. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–4 Plate 5.2–2: View of the concrete path, facing east. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–5 Figure 5.2–1 Cultural Resource Location Map (Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately) Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 5.0–6 Plate 5.2–3: View of one of the shell fragments. Plate 5.2–4: View of the second shell fragment. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 6.0–1 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The archaeological study of the proposed Martin Residence Project consisted of an archaeological survey program and research of available archaeological records. An analysis of archaeological information of this parcel has demonstrated while a site (SDI-627) is recorded at this parcel, the prehistoric site does not qualify as a culturally significant resource as defined by CEQA (Section 15064.5) and City of Carlsbad significance evaluation criteria. No artifacts, features, or darkened midden soils were observed during the site study. The narrow range of cultural material (two shell fragments) and the historic impacts to the property since the 1930s indicate that any remnants of the site within the project area have been largely destroyed. The current survey program and site review has sufficiently demonstrated that the portion of Site SDI-627 recorded within the project boundaries lacks any further research potential. Based upon the finding that the site is not significant, impacts resulting from grading of the lot will not be adverse. Measures to mitigate impacts to cultural resources will not be required. While the investigation of Site SDI-627 has concluded that the resource within the property is not significant, the presence of marine shell fragments on the property that are associated with SDI-627 is the basis for the recommendation that a qualified archaeologist and a Native American representative should monitor earthwork activities associated with the construction of the new residence. Mitigation monitoring during grading is recommended to treat any cultural resources that might be exposed during grading. Mitigation monitoring would follow an MMRP typical for construction projects in the City of Carlsbad. The MMRP would include archaeological and Native American monitoring and would present protocols to be followed in the event of the discovery of cultural resources or human remains. An archaeological monitor will facilitate the identification and review of any cultural material exposed during project activities. In the event that potentially important deposits, features, or human remains are discovered during grading, the archaeological monitor or the Native American representative will have the authority to divert grading away from the discovery and conduct significance evaluations and data recovery as necessary. Any resources identified during grading will be subjected to mitigation measures as specified by City of Carlsbad archaeological and historical guidelines. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– 7.0–1 7.0 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this archaeological report, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and have been compiled in accordance with CEQA criteria as defined in Section 15064.5 and City of Carlsbad cultural resource criteria. October 7, 2021 Brian F. Smith Date Principal Investigator Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–1 8.0 REFERENCES CITED Beauchamp, R. Mitchel 1986 A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater River Press, National City, California. Bean, Lowell John and Florence C. Shipek 1978 “Luiseño.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California, edited by R. F. Heizer. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. Bedwell, S. F. 1970 “Prehistory and Environment of the Pluvial Fort Rock Area of South-central Oregon.” Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene. Bowman, R. H., A. A. House, G. Kester, D. D. Estrada, J. K. Wachtell, G. L. Anderson, and P. V. Campo 1973 Soil Survey of the San Diego Area, California. Part I. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. Bull, Charles S. 1987 “A New Proposal: Some Suggestions for San Diego Prehistory.” In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy. Edited by Dennis Gallegos. San Diego County Archaeological Society Research Paper (No. 1). Byrd, B.F. 1998 “Harvesting the Littoral Landscape During the Late Holocene: New Perspectives from Northern San Diego County.” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 20(2):195-218 Byrd, Brian F. and Collin O’Neill 2002 Archaeological Survey Report for the Phase I Archaeological Survey Along Interstate 5 San Diego County, California. ASM, Inc. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Carrico, Richard L. and Clifford V. F. Taylor 1983 “Excavation of a Portion of Ystagua: A Coastal Valley Ipai Settlement.” Environmental Impact Report on file at the City of San Diego, Environmental Quality Division. Carrico, R. L. and D.R. Gallegos 1988 “Data Recovery program for a Portion of Pump Station 64 Force Main Improvement.” Manuscript on file, South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University, San Diego, California Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–2 Davis, E. L., C. W. Brott and D. L. Weide 1969 “The Western Lithic Co-Tradition.” San Diego Museum Papers (No. 6). San Diego Museum of Man, San Diego. Gallegos, Dennis 1991 “Antiquity and Adaptation at Agua Hedionda, Carlsbad, California.” In Hunter- Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by John M. Erlandson and Roger H. Colton, pp. 19-41. Perspectives in California Archaeology, No. 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1992 “Historical/Archaeological Survey and Test Report for Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, California.” Report on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. Gallegos, Dennis (editor) 1987 “San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy.” Research Paper (No. 1), San Diego. Gallegos, Dennis and Richard Carrico 1984 “Windsong Shores Data Recovery Program for Site W-131, Carlsbad, California.” Report on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. Gallegos, Dennis, R. Phillips and Carolyn Kyle 1988 “Five Thousand Years of Maritime Subsistence at Ballast Point Prehistoric Site SDI-48 (W-164), San Diego, California.” Prepared for the Department of the Navy by Westec Services, Inc., San Diego. Gallegos, Dennis, Andrew Pigniolo and Roxana Phillips 1989 “A Cultural And Paleontological Inventory Update for the University of California at San Diego and Scripps Institution of Oceanography.” Manuscript on file with the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. Hayden, Julian D. 1987 “Notes on the Apparent Course of San Dieguito Development.” In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy. Edited by Susan M. Hector. San Diego County Archaeological Society Research Paper (No. 1). Kaldenberg, Russell 1982 “Rancho Park North: A San Dieguito-La Jolla Shellfish Processing Site in Coastal Southern California.” Occasional Papers (No. 6). Imperial Valley College Museum Society, El Centro, California. Koerper, Henry, C., Jonathan E. Ericson, Christopher E. Drover, and Paul E. Langenwalter II 1986 Obsidian Exchange in Prehistoric Orange County. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 22 (1):33–69. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–3 Koerper, Henry C., Paul E. Langenwalter and Adella Schroth 1991 “Early Holocene Adaptations and the Transition Phase Problem: Evidence from the Allan O. Kelly Site, Agua Hedionda Lagoon.” In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California. Edited by Jon M. Erlandson and Roger H. Colten. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 1, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Kroeber, A. L. 1976 Handbook of the Indians of California. Reprinted. Dover Editions, Dover Publications, Inc., New York. Originally published 1925, Bulletin No. 78, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Masters, Patricia, Ph.D., Gallegos, Dennis and Carolyn Kyle 1988 Five Thousand Years of Marine Subsistence at Ballast Point Prehistoric Site SDI-48 (W-164) San Diego, California. Report on file with the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. Meighan, C. W. 1954 “A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory.” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology Vol. 10, No. 2. Miller, Jaquelin Neva 1966 “The Present and the Past Molluscan Faunas and Environments of Four Southern California Coastal Lagoons.” Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of California, San Diego. Moratto, Michael J. 1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Moriarty, James R., III 1966 “Culture Phase Divisions Suggested by Topological Change Coordinated with Stratigraphically Controlled Radiocarbon Dating in San Diego.” Anthropological Journal of Canada (Vol. 4, No. 4). 1967 “Transitional Pre-Desert Phase in San Diego County.” Science Vol. 155. 1969 “San Dieguito Complex: Suggested Environmental and Cultural Relationships.” Anthropological Journal of Canada (Vol. 7, No. 3). 1987 “A Separate Origins Theory for Two Early Man Cultures in California.” In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy. Edited by Susan M. Hector. San Diego County Archaeological Society Research Paper (No. 1). Pallette, Drew 2003 Cultural Resources Study for The Proposed NCTD FAO Facility Project. Unpublished Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–4 report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Raven-Jennings, Shelly, Brian F. Smith and Johnna L. Buysse 1996 “The Results of a Cultural Resource Study at the 4S Ranch, Rancho Bernardo, County of San Diego.” Report on file at Brian F. Smith and Associates, San Diego, California. Rogers, Malcolm J. 1939 “Early Lithic Industries of the Lower Basin of the Colorado River and Adjacent Desert Areas.” San Diego Museum Papers (No. 3). San Diego Museum of Man. 1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West. Edited with contributions by H. M. Worthington, E. L. Davis, and Clark W. Brott. Union Tribune Publishing Company, San Diego. Rosen, Martin D. 1999 Historic Property Survey Report Oceanside to San Diego-Rail to Trail. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Seeman, Larry 1982 Draft Environmental Impact Report Revised Parks and Recreation Element, Carlsbad, California. Unpublished report on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Shumway, George, Carl L. Hubbs and James R. Moriarty 1961 “Scripps Estate Site, San Diego, California: A La Jollan Site Dated 5,460-7,370 Years Before the Present.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 93, No. 3). Smith, Brian F. 1987 “The Excavations at Site CA-SDI-9956/W-3376.” Environmental Impact Report on file at the County of San Diego, Department of Planning and Land Use. Smith, Brian F. and James R. Moriarty, III 1983 “An Archaeological Evaluation of a Drainage Channel Project at the South Sorrento Business Park.” Environmental Impact Report on file at the City of San Diego. 1985 “The Archaeological Excavations at Site W-20.” Report on file at the City of San Diego, Environmental Quality Division. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) 1995 Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–5 Strong, William Duncan 1929 “Aboriginal Society in Southern California.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 26 (1) True, D. L. 1958 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity (Vol. 23, No. 3). 1980 “The Pauma Complex in Northern San Diego County: 1978.” Journal of New World Archaeology 3(4). Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. True, D.L., C.W. Meighan and Harvey Crew 1974 “Archaeological Investigations at Molpa, San Diego County, California.” University of California Publications in Anthropology (No. 11), Berkeley. Wallace 1958 Site record form for Site CA-SDI-627. Site form on file at the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Wallace, William J. 1955 “A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology.” Southwestern Journal of Anthropology (Vol. 11, No. 3). Albuquerque. Walker, E.F. 1951 “Five Prehistoric Sites in Los Angeles County, California.” Publications of the Frederick Webb Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund 6:1-116 Warren, Claude N. 1966 “The San Dieguito Type Site: Malcolm J. Rogers’ 1938 Excavation on the San Dieguito River.” San Diego Museum Papers (No. 6). 1967 “The San Dieguito Complex: A Review and Hypothesis.” American Antiquity, Vol. 2, No. 2. Salt Lake City, Utah. 1968 “Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast.” In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States. Edited by C. Irwin-Williams. Eastern New Mexico Contributions in Anthropology (Vol. 1, No. 3). Warren, Claude N. and D.L. True 1961 “The San Dieguito Complex and Its Place in California Prehistory.” Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1960-1961:246-337. University of California, Los Angeles. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8.0–6 Warren, C. N., D. L. True and Ardith A. Eudy 1961 “Early Gathering Complexes of Western San Diego County: Results and Interpretations of an Archaeological Survey.” Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1960–1961:246–338. University of California, Los Angeles. WESTEC Services, Inc. 1975 “Rimbach Property Archaeological Report.” Manuscript on file, South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University, San Diego, California. Cultural Resources Study for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX A Resumes of Key Personnel Brian F. Smith, MA Owner, Principal Investigator Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road — Suite A — Phone: (858) 679-8218 — Fax: (858) 679-9896 — E-Mail: bsmith@bfsa-ca.com Education Master of Arts, History, University of San Diego, California 1982 Bachelor of Arts, History, and Anthropology, University of San Diego, California 1975 Professional Memberships Society for California Archaeology Experience Principal Investigator 1977–Present Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Poway, California Brian F. Smith is the owner and principal historical and archaeological consultant for Brian F. Smith and Associates. Over the past 32 years, he has conducted over 2,500 cultural resource studies in California, Arizona, Nevada, Montana, and Texas. These studies include every possible aspect of archaeology from literature searches and large-scale surveys to intensive data recovery excavations. Reports prepared by Mr. Smith have been submitted to all facets of local, state, and federal review agencies, including the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Homeland Security. In addition, Mr. Smith has conducted studies for utility companies (Sempra Energy) and state highway departments (CalTrans). Professional Accomplishments These selected major professional accomplishments represent research efforts that have added significantly to the body of knowledge concerning the prehistoric life ways of cultures once present in the Southern California area and historic settlement since the late 18th century. Mr. Smith has been principal investigator on the following select projects, except where noted. Downtown San Diego Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Programs: Large numbers of downtown San Diego mitigation and monitoring projects, some of which included Broadway Block (2019), 915 Grape Street (2019), 1919 Pacific Highway (2018), Moxy Hotel (2018), Makers Quarter Block D (2017), Ballpark Village (2017), 460 16th Street (2017), Kettner and Ash (2017), Bayside Fire Station (2017), Pinnacle on the Park (2017), IDEA1 (2016), Blue Sky San Diego (2016), Pacific Gate (2016), Pendry Hotel (2015), Cisterra Sempra Office Tower (2014), 15th and Island (2014), Park and G (2014), Comm 22 (2014), 7th and F Street Parking (2013), Ariel Suites (2013), 13th and Marker (2012), Strata (2008), Hotel Indigo (2008), Lofts at 707 10th Avenue Project (2007), Breeza (2007), Bayside at the Embarcadero (2007), Aria (2007), Icon (2007), Vantage Pointe (2007), Aperture (2007), Sapphire Tower (2007), Lofts at 655 Sixth Avenue (2007), Metrowork (2007), The Legend (2006), The Mark (2006), Smart Corner (2006), Lofts at 677 7th Avenue (2005), Aloft on Cortez Hill (2005), Front and Beech Apartments (2003), Bella Via Condominiums (2003), Acqua Vista Residential Tower (2003), Northblock Lofts (2003), Westin Park Place Hotel (2001), Parkloft Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2 Apartment Complex (2001), Renaissance Park (2001), and Laurel Bay Apartments (2001). 1900 and 1912 Spindrift Drive: An extensive data recovery and mitigation monitoring program at the Spindrift Site, an important prehistoric archaeological habitation site stretching across the La Jolla area. The project resulted in the discovery of over 20,000 artifacts and nearly 100,000 grams of bulk faunal remains and marine shell, indicating a substantial occupation area (2013-2014). San Diego Airport Development Project: An extensive historic assessment of multiple buildings at the San Diego International Airport and included the preparation of Historic American Buildings Survey documentation to preserve significant elements of the airport prior to demolition (2017-2018). Citracado Parkway Extension: A still-ongoing project in the city of Escondido to mitigate impacts to an important archaeological occupation site. Various archaeological studies have been conducted by BFSA resulting in the identification of a significant cultural deposit within the project area. Westin Hotel and Timeshare (Grand Pacific Resorts): Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of Carlsbad consisted of the excavation of 176 one-square-meter archaeological data recovery units which produced thousands of prehistoric artifacts and ecofacts, and resulted in the preservation of a significant prehistoric habitation site. The artifacts recovered from the site presented important new data about the prehistory of the region and Native American occupation in the area (2017). The Everly Subdivision Project: Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of El Cajon resulted in the identification of a significant prehistoric occupation site from both the Late Prehistoric and Archaic Periods, as well as producing historic artifacts that correspond to the use of the property since 1886. The project produced an unprecedented quantity of artifacts in comparison to the area encompassed by the site, but lacked characteristics that typically reflect intense occupation, indicating that the site was used intensively for food processing (2014-2015). Ballpark Village: A mitigation and monitoring program within three city blocks in the East Village area of San Diego resulting in the discovery of a significant historic deposit. Nearly 5,000 historic artifacts and over 500,000 grams of bulk historic building fragments, food waste, and other materials representing an occupation period between 1880 and 1917 were recovered (2015-2017). Archaeology at the Padres Ballpark: Involved the analysis of historic resources within a seven-block area of the “East Village” area of San Diego, where occupation spanned a period from the 1870s to the 1940s. Over a period of two years, BFSA recovered over 200,000 artifacts and hundreds of pounds of metal, construction debris, unidentified broken glass, and wood. Collectively, the Ballpark Project and the other downtown mitigation and monitoring projects represent the largest historical archaeological program anywhere in the country in the past decade (2000-2007). 4S Ranch Archaeological and Historical Cultural Resources Study: Data recovery program consisted of the excavation of over 2,000 square meters of archaeological deposits that produced over one million artifacts, containing primarily prehistoric materials. The archaeological program at 4S Ranch is the largest archaeological study ever undertaken in the San Diego County area and has produced data that has exceeded expectations regarding the resolution of long-standing research questions and regional prehistoric settlement patterns. Charles H. Brown Site: Attracted international attention to the discovery of evidence of the antiquity of man in North America. Site located in Mission Valley, in the city of San Diego. Del Mar Man Site: Study of the now famous Early Man Site in Del Mar, California, for the San Diego Science Foundation and the San Diego Museum of Man, under the direction of Dr. Spencer Rogers and Dr. James R. Moriarty. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 3 Old Town State Park Projects: Consulting Historical Archaeologist. Projects completed in the Old Town State Park involved development of individual lots for commercial enterprises. The projects completed in Old Town include Archaeological and Historical Site Assessment for the Great Wall Cafe (1992), Archaeological Study for the Old Town Commercial Project (1991), and Cultural Resources Site Survey at the Old San Diego Inn (1988). Site W-20, Del Mar, California: A two-year-long investigation of a major prehistoric site in the Del Mar area of the city of San Diego. This research effort documented the earliest practice of religious/ceremonial activities in San Diego County (circa 6,000 years ago), facilitated the projection of major non-material aspects of the La Jolla Complex, and revealed the pattern of civilization at this site over a continuous period of 5,000 years. The report for the investigation included over 600 pages, with nearly 500,000 words of text, illustrations, maps, and photographs documenting this major study. City of San Diego Reclaimed Water Distribution System: A cultural resource study of nearly 400 miles of pipeline in the city and county of San Diego. Master Environmental Assessment Project, City of Poway: Conducted for the City of Poway to produce a complete inventory of all recorded historic and prehistoric properties within the city. The information was used in conjunction with the City’s General Plan Update to produce a map matrix of the city showing areas of high, moderate, and low potential for the presence of cultural resources. The effort also included the development of the City’s Cultural Resource Guidelines, which were adopted as City policy. Draft of the City of Carlsbad Historical and Archaeological Guidelines: Contracted by the City of Carlsbad to produce the draft of the City’s historical and archaeological guidelines for use by the Planning Department of the City. The Mid-Bayfront Project for the City of Chula Vista: Involved a large expanse of undeveloped agricultural land situated between the railroad and San Diego Bay in the northwestern portion of the city. The study included the analysis of some potentially historic features and numerous prehistoric Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Audie Murphy Ranch, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,113.4 acres and 43 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination; direction of field crews; evaluation of sites for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; assessment of cupule, pictograph, and rock shelter sites, co-authoring of cultural resources project report. February- September 2002. Cultural Resources Evaluation of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Otay Ranch Village 13 Project, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of 1,947 acres and 76 sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on County of San Diego and CEQA guidelines; co- authoring of cultural resources project report. May-November 2002. Cultural Resources Survey for the Remote Video Surveillance Project, El Centro Sector, Imperial County: Project manager/director for a survey of 29 individual sites near the U.S./Mexico Border for proposed video surveillance camera locations associated with the San Diego Border barrier Project—project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; site identification and recordation; assessment of potential impacts to cultural resources; meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Border Patrol, and other government agencies involved; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. January, February, and July 2002. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee West GPA, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of nine sites, both prehistoric and historic—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; assessment of sites Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 4 for significance based on County of Riverside and CEQA guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. January-March 2002. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed French Valley Specific Plan/EIR, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of two prehistoric and three historic sites—included project coordination and budgeting; survey of project area; Native American consultation; direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; cultural resources project report in prep. July-August 2000. Cultural Resources Survey and Test of Sites Within the Proposed Development of the Menifee Ranch, Riverside County, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of one prehistoric and five historic sites—included project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature recordation; historic structure assessments; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; historic research; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. February-June 2000. Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of the San Diego Presidio Identified During Water Pipe Construction for the City of San Diego, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project report in prep. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Tyrian 3 Project, La Jolla, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Lamont 5 Project, Pacific Beach, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. April 2000. Enhanced Cultural Resource Survey and Evaluation for the Reiss Residence Project, La Jolla, California: Project manager/director of the investigation of a single-dwelling parcel—included project coordination; assessment of parcel for potentially buried cultural deposits; authoring of cultural resources project report. March-April 2000. Salvage Mitigation of a Portion of Site SDM-W-95 (CA-SDI-211) for the Poinsettia Shores Santalina Development Project and Caltrans, Carlsbad, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis and authoring of cultural resources project report in prep. December 1999-January 2000. Survey and Testing of Two Prehistoric Cultural Resources for the Airway Truck Parking Project, Otay Mesa, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. December 1999-January 2000. Cultural Resources Phase I and II Investigations for the Tin Can Hill Segment of the Immigration and Naturalization Services Triple Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director for a survey and testing of a prehistoric quarry site along the border—NRHP eligibility assessment; project coordination and budgeting; direction of field crews; feature recordation; meeting and coordinating with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; co-authoring of cultural resources project report. December 1999-January 2000. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 5 Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Westview High School Project for the City of San Diego, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program including collection of material for specialized faunal and botanical analyses; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; co-authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. October 1999-January 2000. Mitigation of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Otay Ranch SPA-One West Project for the City of Chula Vista, California: Project archaeologist/director—included direction of field crews; development of data recovery program; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. September 1999-January 2000. Monitoring of Grading for the Herschel Place Project, La Jolla, California: Project archaeologist/ monitor— included monitoring of grading activities associated with the development of a single- dwelling parcel. September 1999. Survey and Testing of a Historic Resource for the Osterkamp Development Project, Valley Center, California: Project archaeologist/ director—included direction of field crews; development and completion of data recovery program; budget development; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999. Survey and Testing of a Prehistoric Cultural Resource for the Proposed College Boulevard Alignment Project, Carlsbad, California: Project manager/director —included direction of field crews; development and completion of testing recovery program; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report, in prep. July-August 1999. Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources for the Palomar Christian Conference Center Project, Palomar Mountain, California: Project archaeologist—included direction of field crews; assessment of sites for significance based on CEQA guidelines; management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July-August 1999. Survey and Evaluation of Cultural Resources at the Village 2 High School Site, Otay Ranch, City of Chula Vista, California: Project manager/director —management of artifact collections cataloging and curation; assessment of site for significance based on CEQA guidelines; data synthesis; authoring of cultural resources project report. July 1999. Cultural Resources Phase I, II, and III Investigations for the Immigration and Naturalization Services Triple Fence Project Along the International Border, San Diego County, California: Project manager/director for the survey, testing, and mitigation of sites along border—supervision of multiple field crews, NRHP eligibility assessments, Native American consultation, contribution to Environmental Assessment document, lithic and marine shell analysis, authoring of cultural resources project report. August 1997- January 2000. Phase I, II, and II Investigations for the Scripps Poway Parkway East Project, Poway California: Project archaeologist/project director—included recordation and assessment of multicomponent prehistoric and historic sites; direction of Phase II and III investigations; direction of laboratory analyses including prehistoric and historic collections; curation of collections; data synthesis; coauthorship of final cultural resources report. February 1994; March-September 1994; September-December 1995. Tra cy A. Stro pes , MA, RPA Senior Project Archaeologist Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 14010 Poway Road — Suite A — Phone: (858) 679-8218 — Fax: (858) 679-9896 — E-Mail: tstropes@bfsa-ca.com Education Master of Arts, Anthropology, San Diego State University, California 2007 Bachelor of Science, Anthropology, University of California, Riverside 2000 Professional Memberships Register of Professional Archaeologists Society for California Archaeology Archaeological Institute of America Experience Senior Project Archaeologist March 2009–Present Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. Poway, California Project Management of all phases of archaeological investigations for local, state, and federal agencies, field supervision, lithic analysis, National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) site evaluations, and authoring/coauthoring of cultural resource management reports. Archaeological Principal Investigator June 2008–February 2009 TRC Solutions Irvine, California Cultural resource segment of Natural Sciences and Permitting Division; management of archaeological investigations for private companies and local, state, and federal agencies, personnel management, field and laboratory supervision, lithic analysis, Native American consultation and reporting, MRHP and CEQA site evaluations, and authoring/coauthoring cultural resource management reports. Principal Investigator and Project Archaeologist June 2006–May 2008 Archaeological Resource Analysts Oceanside, California As a sub consultant, served as Principal Investigator and Project Archaeologist for several projects for SRS Inc., including field direction, project and personnel management, lab analysis, and authorship of company reports. Project Archaeologist September 1996–June 2006 Gallegos & Associates Carlsbad, California Project management, laboratory management, lithic analysis, field direction, Native American consultation, report authorship/technical editing, and composition of several data Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 2 recovery/preservation programs for both CEQA and NEPA level compliance. Project Archaeologist September 1993–September 1996 Macko Inc. Santa Ana, California Project management, laboratory management, lithic analysis, field supervision, and report authorship/technical editing. Archaeological Field Technician January 1993–September 1993 Chambers Group Inc. Irvine, California Archaeological excavation, surveying, monitoring, wet screen facilities management, and project logistics. Archaeological Field Technician May 1992–September 1992 John Minch and Associates San Juan Capistrano, California Archaeological excavation, surveying, monitoring, wet screen facilities management, and project logistics. Professional Accomplishments Mr. Stropes is a professional archaeologist with over 30 years of experience in cultural resource management. His experience includes over ten years in project management, report authorship, lithic analysis, laboratory management, Native American consultation, and editing for several technical reports for numerous projects throughout southern California. Mr. Stropes has conducted cultural resource surveys, archaeological site testing and evaluations for National Register eligibility and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance, mitigation of resources through data recovery for archaeological sites, budget and report preparation, and direction of crews of all sizes for projects ranging in duration from a single day site visit to one year. Mr. Stropes is a Registered Professional Archaeologist and on the list of archaeological consultants qualified to conduct archaeological investigations southern California and the County of San Diego. He has served as project archaeologist for numerous projects and composed data recovery and preservation programs for sites throughout California for both CEQA and NEPA level compliance. He has acted as teaching assistant for archaeological field classes at several sites in Orange (Cypress College), Los Angeles (Cypress College), and San Diego Counties (San Diego State University). In addition, Mr. Stropes was employed to teach discussion sessions for introduction to cultural anthropology classes at SDSU. Internationally, Mr. Stropes has acted as field surveyor for the Natural History Foundation of Orange County & Institucion Nacional de Antropologia y Historia surveying and relocating several sites in northern Baja California. Mr. Stropes has served as the senior project archaeologist on the following select projects. 1900 and 1912 Spindrift Drive: An extensive data recovery and mitigation monitoring program at the Spindrift Site, an important prehistoric archaeological habitation site stretching across the La Jolla area. The project resulted in the discovery of over 20,000 artifacts and nearly 100,000 grams of bulk faunal remains and marine shell, indicating a substantial occupation area (2013-2014). Ocean Breeze Ranch: An extensive CEQA and Section 106 archaeological investigation of 1,400 acres and 20 cultural resources, both prehistoric and historic, within the Bonsall neighborhood of the county of San Diego. The project included an assessment of sites for eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources, the County of San Diego Resource Protection Ordinance, and the National Register of Historic Places, which resulted in the identification of four CRHR-eligible, RPO-significant, and NRHP-eligible sites. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. 3 Citracado Parkway Extension: An ongoing project in the city of Escondido to mitigate impacts to an important archaeological occupation site. Various archaeological studies have been conducted by BFSA, including CEQA-level survey and testing programs and Section 106 historic resources studies, resulting in the identification of a significant cultural deposit within the project area (2009-present). Otay Ranch Village 13: An extensive archaeological investigation of nearly 2,000 acres and 84 archaeological sites, both prehistoric and historic, within the county of San Diego, which included prehistoric habitation sites, quarry sites, resource processing sites, and extensive lithic scatters. The project included an assessment of sites for eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (2016-2018). Westin Hotel and Timeshare (Grand Pacific Resorts): Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of Carlsbad consisted of the excavation of 176 one-square-meter archaeological data recovery units which produced thousands of prehistoric artifacts and ecofacts, and resulted in the preservation of a significant prehistoric habitation site. The artifacts recovered from the site presented important new data about the prehistory of the region and Native American occupation in the area (2017). Cantarini Ranch: A Section 106 archaeological assessment and evaluation for the NRHP of 15 archaeological sites and three isolates, including NRHP-significant prehistoric temporary camp/habitation sites, in the city of Carlsbad (2015-2017). Citracado Business Park West: An archaeological survey and testing program at a significant prehistoric archaeological site and historic building assessment for a 17-acre project in the city of Escondido. The project resulted in the identification of 82 bedrock milling features, two previously recorded loci and two additional and distinct loci, and approximately 2,000 artifacts (2018). College Boulevard: A Section 106 archaeological assessment and evaluation for the NRHP of seven archaeological sites, including prehistoric temporary camp/habitation sites, bedrock milling feature sites, and both prehistoric and historic artifact scatters in the city of Carlsbad (2015). The Everly Subdivision Project: Data recovery and mitigation monitoring program in the city of El Cajon resulted in the identification of a significant prehistoric occupation site from both the Late Prehistoric and Archaic Periods, as well as producing historic artifacts that correspond to the use of the property since 1886. The project produced an unprecedented quantity of artifacts in comparison to the area encompassed by the site, but lacked characteristics that typically reflect intense occupation, indicating that the site was used intensively for food processing (2014-2015). Cultural Resources Study for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX B Archaeological Records Search Results (Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately) Cultural Resources Study for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX C NAHC Sacred Lands File Search Results (Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately) Cultural Resources Study for the Martin Residence Project _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPENDIX D Confidential Maps (Deleted for Public Review; Bound Separately)