HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 12-01; Miles Pacific Subdivision; Tentative Map (CT) (6)• .. . 'r •
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DIVISION
A CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY FOR THE
MILES PACIFIC PROJECT
Prepared for:
Mr. Rod Bradley
BHA, Inc.
5115 A venida Encinas, Suite L
Carlsbad, California 92008-4387
Prepared by:
TonyT. Quach
and
MarkS. Becker, PhD., RPA
ASM Affiliates, Inc.
2034 Corte del Nogal
Carlsbad, California 92011
October 2012
PN 19860
Keywords:
7.5' Quadmngle: San Luis Rey
California, City of Carlsbad, Buena Vista Lagoon, Archaeological Survey, SDI-17 ,672
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
ABSTRACT ••••••••••..•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• iii
1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................•............ 1
2. HISTORICAL CONTEXT ......................................................................•............. 5
CULTURE HISTORY ........................................................................................................ 5
San Dieguito/Pa1eoindian Period ................................................................................... 5
La Jolla/Archaic Period .................................................................................................. 6
Late Prehistoric .............................................................................................................. 7
Mexican and American Historic Periods ....................................................................... 8
3. RECORD SEARCH AND PROJECT APPROACH ........................................ ll
RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS ..................................................................................... 14
DescriptionofPrevious Findings ofSDI-17,672 ......................................................... 15
FIELD METHODS ........................................................................................................... 15
Pedestrian Survey Methods .......................................................................................... 15
4. RESULTS .........•.................................................................................................... 17
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. 21
REFERENCES ..............................................................................................••................ 23
APPENDICES .....................................................................................................••........... 27
APPENDIX A -Native American Heritage Commission Letters
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS
,.
Table of Contents
Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.2.
Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.5.
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
II
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Vicinity map of the project area .............................................................................. 2
Location map of the project area ............................................................................ 3
Overview of the project area, facing west. ........................................................... 17
Igneous gravel that overlies most of the ground surface ...................................... 18
Chione and Argopecten shells identified within the APE .................................... 19
The 2006 testing STP shell weight data (in g) arrayed by unit and depth.
Asterisks denote disturbed contexts ...................................................................... 19
LIST OF TABLES
Previous Cultural Resources Reports within 1 mi. of APE .................................. 11
Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 1 mi. ofthe APE ...................... 14
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS
Abstract
ABSTRACT
The Miles Pacific Subdivision Project proposes the residential development of a primarily
undeveloped lot, currently utilized as a plant nursery, located immediately west of the
intersection of Pio Pico Drive and Forest A venue in the City of Carlsbad. The Miles Pacific
Project proposes the development a 17-lot subdivision that would also entail the grading of the
site prior to structural construction activities as well as to mitigate for the presence of toxaphene.
This project was designed to support the planning and regulatory requirements of the
development plan proposed by BHA Inc., in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
The goal of this study was to provide the BHA Inc. with a comprehensive inventory of any
cultural resources within the 5.4-acre Miles Pacific Subdivision Project through a pedestrian
surficial reconnaissance. ASM Affiliates is serving in this capacity as a subcontractor to BHA
Inc.
For the purposes of this study, a record search through the South Coast Information Center
(SCIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) with a 1 mi. buffer
was conducted on September 10, 2012. The SCIC record search indicated that a single
previously recorded cultural resource (CA-SDI-17 ,672) is located within the proposed project
boundaries. An inquiry to the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) also
indicated the presence cultural resources within a 0.5 mi. radius of the project boundary. The
NAHC provided a listing of relevant tribal contacts for further inquiries and follow-up
consultations which will be done by the City of Carlsbad.
On September 20, 2012, ASM surveyed the property and noted that much of the area appeared
disturbed and is overlain with a layer of igneous gravels obscuring much of the ground surface.
During the survey, several pieces of shell were observed within the northwestern portion of the
project APE, within the currently delineated site boundary of SDI-17,672. Though several pieces
of shell were encountered on the surface, it is difficult to definitively determine whether this
minimal presence of shell is the result of prehistoric activity or of modem disturbances, as the
project area lies along the southern terrace of Buena Vista Lagoon. Overall, the project area
appears heavily disturbed to some degree by modem development. Nevertheless, cultural
resource monitoring is still recommended until it can be demonstrated that no significant cultural
resources are present below the surface.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS iii
I. Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
The Miles Pacific Subdivision Project is proposing a residential development of a primarily
vacant lot that is currently utilized as a plant nursery, located immediately west of the intesection
of Pio Pico Drive and Forest Avenue in the City of Carlsbad, in an unsectioned portion of
Township 11 South, Range 4 West in the USGS San Luis Rey, CA 7.5-minute quadrangle
(Figures 1.1 and 1.2). Currently, the project area is the location of the Miles Pacific Palm
Nursery at 2375 Pio Pico Drive. The 5.4-acre subject property has a topographic gradient of
approximately 5 percent, sloping down from Pio Pico Drive toward Interstate 5 to the west.
As proposed, the development will involve the construction of a 17-lot subdivision, with lots
ranging in size from 7,525 ft.2 to 13,782 ft.2 The project would also remove a single-family
residence at 2373 Pio Pico Drive to accommodate the subdivision. In total, the proposed grading
for the project will consist of 10,300 yd.3 of cut and 10,300 yd.3 of fill, with remedial grading
that is expected to displace around 59,300 yd.3. The remedial grading will be required to
mitigate the presence of toxaphene in the upper stratum.
This study presents the goals, methods, and results from a cultural resources inventory for the
project. The goal of this study was to provide the BHA Inc. with a comprehensive inventory of
any cultural resources within the 5.4-acre Miles Pacific Subdivision Project through a pedestrian
surficial reconnaissance. ASM Affiliates is serving in this capacity as a subcontractor to BHA
Inc. The proposed project is being conducted in compliance with CEQA.
After this introduction, the survey report consists of Chapter 2, the archaeological context of the
project area, which reviews the culture history; Chapter 3, describing the record search results
and the survey design; Chapter 4, delineating field methods and results; and Chapter 5, providing
a summary and recommendations.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS
Figure 1.1. Vicinity rna p of the project area.
Miles Pacific S . ubdtvision CRS
0.5 Krn
1:24,000
Figure 1.2. . fthe project area. LocatiOn map o
. p "fie Subdivision CRS Miles aci 3
..
2. Historical Context
2. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
CULTURE HISTORY
Archaeologists, beginning with Malcolm Rogers in the 1930s and 1940s, have applied several
chronological schemes to the coast of southern California, particularly San Diego County, partly
based on perceived changes in chipped stone artifact techno-typology. We suggest that many of
the defined assemblages are probably based on outdated and inaccurately assigned typologies
that need to be reevaluated and tested from multiple perspectives, especially through advances in
rigorous functional studies. Such a reevaluation is important because many of the current
typologies that help define archaeological assemblages are both obscuring important behavioral
patterning and creating some patterns where none may actually exist. Hence, descriptions of the
major chipped stone artifacts associated with each of the three traditional chronological periods
for coastal San Diego County are given below, and include the San Dieguito, La Jolla, and Late
Prehistoric periods. While we recognize that distinct nomenclatures and subdivisions are used by
different archaeologists for these time periods, and various subdivisions are utilized within each
specific period, we tend to focus on the three major periods rather than their subdivisions since
we are interested in illuminating the general patterning.
San Dieguito/Paleoindian Period
The San Dieguito period encompasses human occupation of the San Diego area prior to 7500
B.P. (7500 years before the present). Defining characteristics of the San Dieguito artifact
assemblage include distinct scrapers, bifacial knives, and crescent-shaped eccentrics. The artifact
assemblage is thought to represent a heavy emphasis on the hunting of game (Meighan 1954;
Moriarty 1966; Rogers 1939, 1945; True 1958, 1966, 1970; Warren 1966, 1967, 1987; Warren
and True 1961; Warren et al. 1961). The San Dieguito time frame is equivalent to the
Paleoindian period (11,500 B.P.-8500/7500 B.P.) as defined by Byrd (1996). Much of the
information concerning this time period was recorded from the C. W. Harris Site, known as the
San Dieguito "type" site (Kaldenberg 1976, 1982; Warren 1967, 1966; Warren and True 1961;
Warren et al. 1961).
The major chipped stone tools traditionally assigned to the San Dieguito artifact assemblage
consist of retouched flakes, bifaces, and projectile points. These artifacts are typically made on
volcanic/metavolcanic material, though some quartz, quartzite, and cryptocrystalline tools are
present (Kaldenberg 1976; Moriarty 1966, 1969; True and Bouey 1990; Warren 1966, 1967;
Warren and True 1961; Warren et al. 1961). While cores are evident in the time period,
descriptions of them are rare in the literature. Cores that are described range in size from 103 mm
to 21 mm in length. Recorded cores are typically multidirectional and often display signs of
battering (Warren 1966, 1967).
The majority of retouched flakes from San Dieguito sites are classified as scrapers. Terms used
to describe scrapers associated with the time period include ovoid, domed, and scraper plane
(Kaldenberg 1976; Moriarty 1969; True and Bouey 1990; Warren 1966, 1967; Warren and True
1961; Warren et al. 1961). Ovoid scrapers are oval to circular in shape, and are typically
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 5
--------------------------------------
2. Historical Context
obversely retouched. The tools are unifacially reworked on the distal end of the flake (Moriarty
1969:Figure 3; Warren 1966:14, 1967:173). Ovoid scrapers from the San Dieguito type site
range in size from 40 to 78 mm in length and from 11 to 26 mm in thickness (Warren 1966).
Domed scrapers are described as plano-convex in cross section, with flakes removed from the
edges and distal end of the tool. Flakes were removed steeply to give the tools a domed
appearance, which is formal and regular in shape. Domed scrapers typically range between 34
and 99 mm in length and 6.5 to 25 mm in thickness (Moriarty 1969:Figure 3; True and Bouey
1990:2; Warren 1966:14, 1967:173). Scraper planes are also domed in shape, but are apparently
larger and less formally worked than ovoid and domed scrapers, ranging in size from 34 to 82.5
mm in length and 15 to 45 mm in thickness (Moriarty 1969:Figure 3; True and Bouey 1990;
Warren 1966, 1967). These scrapers are recognizable by a distinct modification on one or more
of their edges (True and Bouey 1990:4-6), and are described as being "made from a thick flake
and steeply flaked around the periphery" (Warren 1966:14). Various end and side scrapers are
also recorded for San Dieguito period sites. These scrapers were usually unifacially retouched on
either a lateral edge of a flake (side scrapers), or distally in the case of end scrapers (Warren
1966:14, 1967:173).
Relatively long bifacial blades (ranging from approximately 62 to 162 mm in length),
traditionally called knives, are considered classic components of San Dieguito sites (Kaldenberg
1976; Moriarty 1969; True and Bouey 1990; Warren 1966, 1967; Warren and True 1961; Warren
et al. 1961 ). Two primary morphological shapes are recorded for San Dieguito knives: leaf-
shaped and parallel-sided. Leaf-shaped knives are thin in cross section, with rounded bases and
narrow tips, while parallel-sided knives have rounded ends and a thick cross section (Moriarty
1969:Figure 3; True and Bouey 1990:13; Warren 1966:15, 1967:173). However, Warren
(1966:174) notes that several knives from the Harris Site fall between these two forms, so that it
is difficult to make a clear-cut division between the two.
Large projectile points, typically longer than 50 mm, are noted at several San Dieguito sites, and
have broad stems with weak shoulders, which is also a characteristic of classic Lake Mojave
points (True and Bouey 1990:13; Warren 1967:174). Leaf-shaped projectile points, described as
smaller versions of the leaf-shaped San Dieguito knife, are also noted. The leaf-shaped points
have lenticular cross sections and round bases (Warren 1966:15, 1967:174). Eared projectile
points, morphologically similar to Elko points, are also found at some sites (Moriarty 1969).
La Jolla/Archaic Period
The La Jolla period, followed by a hiatus or transttlon, encompasses a time frame of
approximately 7500 B.P.-1300 B.P., equating roughly with the Archaic period, which ranges
between 8500/7500 B.P. and 1300/800 B.P. (Byrd 1996). The La Jolla period is thought to
represent an emphasis on littoral resources, as indicated by dense shell midden sites. The tool
assemblage is defined by simple stone cobble tools and an increased emphasis on ground stone
implements (Gallegos 1985, 1987, 1992; Meighan 1954; Moriarty 1966; Rogers 1939, 1945;
True 1958, 1966, 1970; Warren 1967, 1966, 1987; Warren and True 1961; Warren et al. 1961).
Meighan (1954) and True (1958, 1966, 1970) label the inland manifestation during the La Jolla
time period as the Pauma complex of the Millingstone Horizon, while Warren (1968) refers to
the entire complex as the Encinitas period. Chipped stone artifacts appear to represent similar
technologies in different frequencies for the La Jolla and Pauma complexes.
6 1\
2. Historical Context
Chipped stone artifacts associated with the La Jolla period are similar in many ways to San
Dieguito type tools, but the former are considered less sophisticated. Tools made from cortical
flakes or flaked cobbles and distinctive utilized flakes, known as Teshoa flakes, are commonly
assigned to this time period (Kaldenberg 1976; Moriarty 1966; Meighan 1954; Rogers 1939,
1945; True et al. 1974, 1991; Warren 1966, 1967, 1968; Warren and True 1961; Warren et al.
1961 ). While most of these tools were still made of volcanic/metavolcanic material, more of the
quartz, quartzite, and cryptocrystalline materials were utilized (Kaldenberg 197 6; Warren 1966,
1967; Warren and True 1961; Warren et al. 1961). Also, while often noted in the literature,
descriptions of the actual cores are rare, but the scant data indicate that they tend to be
multidirectional and range between 49 and 79 mm in length (Warren 1966).
Teshoa flakes are described as relatively large primary flakes with edge damage from use on the
distal end. The flakes are unmodified beyond this macro use-wear, which apparently represents
scalar edge damage (Kaldenberg 1976; Warren 1966:Plate 21, 1967; Warren and True 1961;
Warren et al. 1961). Kaldenberg (1976) defines Teshoa flakes as being made of quartzite, while
Warren (1966:17) lists them as being "struck from water worn cobble[s]." Warren (1966)
describes a small sample of Teshoa flakes as ranging between 7 6 and 115 mm in length and 15
mm thick.
Typical scrapers from La Jolla sites are described as primary flakes or split cobbles with
unifacial retouch along the edge (Kaldenberg 1976; Warren 1966, 1967; Warren and True 1961;
Warren et al. 1961). Domed scrapers are still reported in La Jolla contexts, but are described as
being made on thicker flakes than San Dieguito domed scrapers, and fashioned in a more "crude"
manner, some with a "D" shaped outline (Warren 1966: 17). A relatively small sample of these
scrapers was recorded, ranging in length from 26 to 90 mm and 12 to 35 mm thick (Warren
1966).
While bifaces are considered rare in La Jolla contexts, knives and projectile points do occur
(Kaldenberg 1976; Warren 1966, 1967; Warren and True 1961; Warren et al. 1961). Large
bifacial knives, morphologically similar to San Dieguito-type knives, are found in some La Jolla
sites. Warren (1966:16-17) suggests that some of these knives may actually be San Dieguito in
origin and therefore either intrusive or curated. Kaldenberg (1976:266) recovered a Lake Mojave
point in a La Jolla context at the Ranch Park North Site. In addition, other La Jolla sites have
produced ''uncharacteristic" projectile point types, including a leaf-shaped point with a flat base
(Warren 1966:16); relatively small triangular-shaped points, some serrated (Kaldenberg 1976;
Warren 1966); and side-notched points (True and Beemer 1982:238). While all these point types
may be intrusive, it begs the question of what is to be included in La Jolla lithic technology.
Late Prehistoric
The time period from the end of the La Jolla to the beginning of the historic period is typically
assigned a range of dates from 1300/800 to 200 B.P., which Byrd (1996) refers to as the Late
Prehistoric period. The period is often broken down into various subdivisions: Yuman I-III for
the San Diego County coast (Rogers 1939, 1945); San Luis Rey-Luisefio periods for the north
interior, and the Cuyamaca-Dieguefio periods for the south interior (Meighan 1954; True 1958,
1966, 1970); and Yuman and Shoshonean periods (Warren 1968). The Late Prehistoric period is
thought to include the introduction of the bow and arrow, use of pottery, and a theorized
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 7
2. Historical Context
emphasis on inland plant resources (Meighan 1954; Rogers 1945; True 1958, 1966, 1970; True
and Waugh 1982; Warren 1964, 1968). Although there is ample evidence of coastal sites dating
to the Late Prehistoric period (Byrd 1996, 1997; Byrd et al. 1995; Reddy et al. 1996), the
majority of the sites used to define this period have been found in inland contexts.
While other lithic tools are represented, projectile point types seem to be the defining
characteristic of Late Prehistoric chipped stone tool assemblages. These small-sized points,
probably associated with bow-and-arrow technology, include several different diagnostic forms
(Meighan 1954; Rogers 1939, 1945; True et al. 1974, 1991; Warren 1968). While
volcanic/metavolcanic material is still prevalent for chipped stone tools, projectile points from
this time period are typically made on quartz, quartzite, chert, and obsidian. Cores are rarely
described, but appear to fall in the same size range as the La Jolla cores, measuring between 49
and 79 mm in length (see True et al. 1991).
Domed scrapers and scraper planes are present in Late Prehistoric sites (Meighan 1954:218,
Plate 1; True et al. 1974:54, 1991:20). True et al. (1991:20) state that domed scrapers are rare at
these sites. Large bifaces, including leaf-shaped knives, also continue into the Late Prehistoric
time period, though they are less frequent (Meighan 1954:218, Plate 1; True et al. 1974:54;
1991:20). True et al. (1974, 1991) describe knives from late sites ranging between 28 and 59 mm
long, and between 40 and 25 mm wide, and domed scrapers between 25 and 82 mm in length,
and 15 to 34 mm thick.
Triangular projectile points, typical of the Cottonwood Triangular morphological type, are
prevalent in Late Prehistoric sites. These triangular points typically have shallow to deep
concave bases, though some variations have straight or convex bases. The majority of the
Cottonwood points have straight, thin edges, but some are side-notched and/or serrated (Meighan
1954:218, Plate 2; True et al. 1974:49, 1991:18-19). Rectangular-to triangular-shaped points
with side notches are sometimes recovered from Late Prehistoric sites. These projectiles are
morphologically the same as the Desert Side-notched point (Meighan 1954:218, Plate 2;True et
al. 1974:50, 1991:18-19). Also found in Late Prehistoric contexts are leaf-shaped projectile
points, though these are uncommon and are not well-made (Meighan 1954:218, Plate 2; True et
al. 1974:50, 1991:19). Other projectile point types common in western North America, such as
Pinto, Elko, Amargosa, and Northern Side-notched, are found in San Diego County Late
Prehistoric sites, but they are rare and thought to be intrusive (True et al. 1991: 17).
Mexican and American Historic Periods
The Hispanic era in California's history includes the Spanish Colonial (1769-1820) and Mexican
Republic (1820-1846) periods. This era witnessed the transition from a society dominated by
religious and military institutions consisting of missions and presidios to a civilian population
residing on large ranchos or in pueblos (Chapman 1925).
During the Mission period, local Native Americans rebelled briefly against Spanish control in
1775. Most of the individuals who participated in the attack were from Tipai settlements south of
the San Diego River valley. The Ipai to the north apparently did not participate in the rebellion,
reflecting possible political affiliations at the time of the attack (Carrico 2008).
8 1\
2. Historical Context
The effects of missionization, along with the introduction of European diseases, greatly reduced
the Native American population of southern California. At the time of contact, Luisefio
population estimates range from 5,000 to as many as 10,000 individuals. Kumeyaay population
levels were probably similar or somewhat higher. Many of the local Kumeyaay were
incorporated into the Spanish sphere of influence at a very early date. Inland Luisefio groups
were not heavily affected by Spanish influence until 1816, when an outpost of the mission was
established 32.2 km further inland at Pala (Sparkman 1908). Most villagers, however, continued
to maintain many of their aboriginal customs and simply adopted the agricultural and animal
husbandry practices learned from Spaniards.
By the early 1820s, California came under Mexico's rule, and in 1834 the missions were
secularized. This resulted in political imbalance and Indian uprisings against the Mexican
rancheros. Many of the Kumeyaay left the missions and ranchos and returned to their original
village settlements (Shipek 1991). When California became a sovereign state in 1850, the
Kumeyaay were heavily recruited as laborers and experienced even harsher treatment. Conflicts
between Native Americans and encroaching Anglos finally led to the establishment of
reservations for some villages, such as Pala and Syquan. Other mission groups were displaced
from their homes, moving to nearby towns or ranches. The reservation system interrupted the
social organization and settlement patterns, yet many aspects of the original culture still persist
today. Certain rituals and religious practices are maintained, and traditional games, songs, and
dances continue, as well as the use of foods such as acorns, yucca, and wild game.
The subsequent American period (1846 to present) witnessed the development of San Diego
County in various ways. This time period includes the rather rapid dominance over Californio
culture by Anglo-Victorian (Yankee) culture and the rise of urban centers and rural communities.
A Frontier period from 1845 to 1870 saw the region's transformation from a feudal-like society
to an aggressive capitalistic economy in which American entrepreneurs gained control of most
large ranchos and transformed San Diego into a merchant-dominated market town. Between
1870 and 1930, urban development established the cities of San Diego, National City, and Chula
Vista, while a rural society based on family-owned farms organized by rural school district
communities also developed. The Army and Navy took an increased interest in the San Diego
harbor between 1900 and 1940. The Army established coastal defense fortifications at Fort
Rosecrans on Point Lorna and the Navy developed major facilities in the bay (Fredericks 1979;
Van Wormer and Roth 1985). The 1920s brought a land boom (Robinson 1942) that stimulated
development throughout the city and county, particularly in the Point Lorna, Pacific Beach, and
Mission Beach areas. Development stalled during the depression years of the 1930s, but World
War II ushered in a period of growth based on expanding defense industries. Battery Point Lorna,
in operation from 1941 to 1943, played a pivotal role in the defense of Fort Rosecrans and San
Diego Bay at the outbreak of World War II.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 9
3. Record Search and Project Approach
3. RECORD SEARCH AND PROJECT APPROACH
This section discusses the results of a record search from the SCIC that provided up-to-date
documentation of cultural resource studies and cultural resources within 1 mi. of the project area
(Table 3.1 and 3.2). The findings from the NARC Sacred Lands file search are also presented.
This will be followed by a discussion of the survey design and methods currently utilized for the
current study.
Table 3.1 Previous Cultural Resources Reports within 1 mi. of APE
NADB Proximity
No. SHPOID Author(s) Year Title to APE
Draft Environmental Impact Report
1124111 SeemanOI Larry Seeman 1982 Revised Parks and Recreation Element, Encompasses
Carlsbad, California.
Byrd, Brian F., and Archaeological Survey Report for the
1129361 Byrdl5 2002 Phase 1 Archaeological Survey along Encompasses Collin O'Neill Interstate 5 San Diego County, CA.
Significance Assessment of Six Cultural
Resource Sites within the College
Collett, Russell, and Boulevard Reach A Alternative 1, One
1132085 Collett27 2001 Site in the Cannon Road Reach 3, and Encompasses Dayle Cheever Three Sites in the Cannon Road Reach 4
Alignments, Bridge and Thoroughfare
District 4.
An Archaeological Historical
1120423 Carrico132 Carrico, Richard 1982 Reconnaissance of the Proposed Buena Outside
Vista Center.
1120535 Cupples24 Cupples, Sue Ann 1976 Oceanside Harbor and Navigation Outside Pro;ect: Archaeolof{ical Survey Report.
1120645 Bulll4a Bull, Charles 1979 A TestofSDM-W-1172, an Outside Archaeological Site in Buena Woods.
1120659 Bulll4B Bull, Charles 1978 An Archaeological Survey of Buena Outside Woods 3-4, Carlsbad, California.
Archaeological TestingofSDI-626, a
1120992 Hannal5 Hanna, David 1984 Coastal Shell Midden Site in Carlsbad, Outside
California.
An Archaeological Survey Report for a
1121154 Laylande22 Laylander, Don 1988 Widening of State Route 78 (I-5 to East Outside of College Boulevard), Oceanside,
California.
1121871 Hector42 Hector, Susan, and Sue 1986 Cultural Resource Survey of the Mauga Outside Wade Proiect Property.
Negative Archaeological Survey Report
1122574 Crafts!O Crafts, Karen 1992 First Addendum: Interchange of Route Outside
78 and Interstate 5 in Oceanside.
1122995 Kyle56 Kyle, Carolyn, and 1995 Negative Archaeological Survey Report. Outside Petei McHenry
Smith, Brian, and Larry A Cultural Resource Survey and
1123027 SmithB 253 1994 Assessment for the Muhe Project, Outside Pierson Carlsbad, California.
Smith, Brian, and Larry Addendum to a Cultural Resource Survey
1123031 SmithB 249 1996 and Assessment for the Muhe Project, Outside Pierson Carlsbad, CalijiJrnia.
1124282 Kyle97 Kyle, Carolyn, and 1995 Negative Archaeological Survey Report Outside Petei McHenry for Highway Project, 11-SD-78 PM.74.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS II
3 Record Search and Project Approach
NADB Proximity
No. SHPOID Author(s) Year Title to APE
Historical Survey for the Carlsbad Union
1124483 Vanwonn21 Van Wormer, Steve 1987 Church and the Gaus House, Carlsbad, Outside
Califi!mia.
Negative Archaeological Survey Report:
1124587 CALTRANS13 Karen Crafts 1991 Upgrade of the Route 781nterstate 5 Outside
Interchange in Oceanside, CA.
Final Report for an Archaeological Test
1124833 CALTRANS25 Caltrans 1982 Excavation at the Site CA-SDI-9473, Outside
Carlsbad, CA.
Summary Report for an Archaeological
1124835 Corum68 Corum, Joyce 1982 Test Excavation at Site CA-SDI-9473, Outside
Oceanside, CA.
1124940 ReconEIR13 Recon 1977 Draft Environmental Impact Report for Outside Buena Woods 3-4.
Frazee Property Draft Environmental
1124946 Recon26 Recon 1978 Impact Report and General Plan Outside
Amendment.
1125845 Lay1and43 Lay1ander, Don 1988 Historic Property Survey Report for a Outside Widening of State Route 78.
1126248 CALTRANSll Caltrans 1998 Negative Archaeological Survey Report, Outside District 11.
1126531 Crafts39 Crafts, Karen 1991 Negative Archaeological Survey Report, Outside 11-SD-78 P.M
1126629 Rosen80 Rosen, Martin 1999 Historic Property Survey Report Outside Oceanside to San Diego -Rail to Trail.
Cultural Resource Assessment Cingular
1127498 Duke110 Duke, Curt 2002 Wireless Facility No. SD443-11, San Outside
Diego County, CA.
1128487 Pa1ette04 Pallette, Drew 2003 Cultural Resources Study for the Outside Proposed NCTD FAO Facility Project.
1128739 Westec97 Westec 1975 Excerpt from City ofCar/sbad-EIR-295, Outside Plaza Camino Real Expansion.
1129003 Rosen105 Rosen, Martin D. 2004 Positive Historic Property Survey Outside Report.
Cultural Resource Inventory for
1129308 Pignioll71 Pigniolo, Andrew 2002 Cingular Jefferson McDonalds Site (SD-Outside
467-01), Cit;y_ of_Oceanside, Calif2mia.
Archaeological Testing at Twelve
Laylander, Don, and Prehistoric Sites (SDI-603, -628, -4533, -
1129362 Layland50 2004 6831, -6882, -10965, -12670, -13484, Outside Mark Becker -15678, -15679, -15680) on the Central
San Diego Coast, San Diego County, CA.
Cultural Resources Inventory Report for
1129470 Cooley30 Cooley, Theodore G., 2004 Four San Luis Rey Land Outfall Pipeline Outside and Richard L. Carrico Route Alternatives, City of Oceanside,
Calip:Jmia.
1129516 CaterinoOI Caterino, David 2005 The Cemeteries and Gravestones of San Outside Diego CouniJI: An Archaeological Stuliy.
City of Carlsbad Water and Sewer
1129571 GuerreM 20 Guerrero, Monica C., 2003 Master Plans Cultural Resource Outside and Dennis R. Gallegos Background Study City of Carlsbad,
California.
Record Search and Site Visit Results for
Lauko, Kimberly, and Sprint Telecommunications Facility
1130056 LaukoK12 2004 Candidate SD34xC858B (Fire Mountain) Outside Christeen Taniguchi Adjacent to 1789 Troy Lane, Oceanside,
San Diego CounfL Califi!rnia.
12 ]\
~-------___ __j
3. Record Search and Project Approach
NADB Proximity
No. SHPOID Author(s) Year Title to APE
Final Cultural Resources Survey of 2000
1130197 CookJI09 Cook, John 2006 Stewart Street, San Diego County, Outside
California.
Cultural Resources Final Report of
1130551 ArringtOl Arrington, Cindy 2006 Monitoring and Findings for the Qwest Outside Network Construction Project, State of
California.
1130602 Robbinsl83 Robbins-Wade, Mary, 2007 Avocado Highlands Archaeological Outside and Matt Sivba Survey (Affinis Job No.2190).
Carlsbad Santa Fe Depot, 400 Carlsbad
1130847 HISTORI113 Various VARI Village Drive (Elm Ave.), Carlsbad, Outside
California 92008.
1131269 HISTORI248 Various VARI Santa Fe Depot-Carlsbad. Outside
Cultural Resource Records Search
Results and Site Visit for Cricket
1131602 BonneW155 Bonner, Wayne H., and 2008 Telecommunications Facility Candidate Outside Mamie Aislin-Kay San-119B (Amazon Bikes), 1227 Vista
Way, Oceanside, San Diego County,
California.
1131761 Dorninici67 Dominici, Deb 2007 Historic Property Survey Report, 1-5 Outside North Coast WideninK Project.
Archaeological Survey for the Caltrans 1-
1131783 LaylaD57 Laylander, Don, and 2008 5 North Coast Corridor Project Outside LindaAkyuz Biological Mitigation Parcels, San Diego
County, California.
Cultural Resource Records Search and
Bonner, Wayne H., and Site Visit Results forT-Mobile Facility
1131880 BonneW184 Mamie Aislin-Kay 2008 Candidate SD06295U (Carlsbad High Outside
School), 3557 Lancer Way, Carlsbad,
San Die!{o County, California.
Cultural Resource Survey Carlsbad High
1132152 Kyle346 Kyle, Carolyn E. 2009 School, 3557 Lancer Way, City of Outside Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
California.
Cultural Resources Records Search and
Bonner, Wayne, and Site Visit Results for Verizon Wireless
1132557 BonneW265 Sarah Williams 2008 Candidate Five/78 at 1501 Kelly Street, Outside
Oceanside, San Diego County,
California.
Historic Property Survey Report for the
1132693 TangB04 Tang, Bai "Tom" 2009 Proposed Construction of a Second Outside Mainline Track in the City of Carlsbad
by the North County Transit District.
Archaeological Survey Report: Carlsbad
Double Track Project, Control Point
1132738 HoganMOl Hogan, Michael, and 2009 Carl (MP229.3) to Control Point Farr Outside Deirdre Encarnacion (MP231.7), North County Transit
District Mainline San Diego County,
California Caltrans District 11.
Historic Property Survey Report for the
1132762 Dorninici70 Dominici, Debra 2010 Interstate 5 North Coast Corridor Outside
Project.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 13
3. Record Search and Project Approach
Table 3.2 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 1 mi. of the APE
Primary
No. Trinomial Principal Recorder(s) Proximity
P-37-CA-SDI-(Month/Year) Description (Quantity) to APE
027036 17,672 Pallette (11/05) AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden Intersects
000627 627 Wallace (8/58) AP 16. Other -Campsite (largely destroyed) Outside
Wallace (1958); Pierson, AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage (50+), manos (4),
metate fragments (2), core (I), choppers (2), 000628 628 Smith (8/94); Laylander hammer stones (5); AP15. Habitation Debris-Outside
(2/03) shell midden
000629 629 Wallace (8/58); Noah (2009) AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage, manos (2); AP15. Outside Habitation Debris
AP2. Lithic Scatter -core fragments; AP 11.
005077 5077 Hatley ( 1177) Hearth/Pit (1), FAR; AP15. Habitation Debris-Outside
shell midden;
007880 7880 Franklin (3/80) AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden Outside
008346 8346 Franklin (9/80) AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden Outside
008455 8455 Cardenas ( 1181) AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden Outside
AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage (16), cores (3),
010146 10,146 Cardenas et a!. (I 0/86) manos (2), hammer stones (3), scrapers (6); Outside
AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden
014646 14,259 Schultz (l /96) AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage (15), core (1 ); Outside AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden
027452 11,901 Lay1ander (6/06) AH12. Graves/Cemetery Outside
028351 18,348 Sivba et a!. (2/07) AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage (l); AP15. Outside Habitation Debris -shell midden
029410 18,819 Anderson ( 4/08) AP2. Lithic Scatter -metate ( 1 ); AP 15. Outside Habitation Debris -shell midden
030500 19,375 Noah (5/09) AP2. Lithic Scatter-debitage (I); API5. Outside Habitation Debris -shell midden
032654 20,692 Giletti ( 4/12) AP15. Habitation Debris-shell midden Outside
RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
On September 10, 2012, a record search was requested from the SCIC for information
concerning previously recorded cultural resources within 1 mi. of the project area. On the same
date, a letter was sent to the NAHC to inquire about known areas of cultural concern that may
exist within a 0.5 mi. of the project area.
The records search at SCIC identified 49 reports on file whose study areas included locations
within a 1 mi. radius of the project area, including three reports that address areas that either
encompass the currently proposed project area or intersect its boundary (see Table 3.1). The
record search with the SCIC also identified 15 previously recorded cultural resources and 16
historic residences that are located within 1 mi. of the project area (see Table 3.2). Of these
previously recorded resources and residences, only a single cultural resource, SDI-17,672, is
documented as occupying a portion of the project area. All the other resources were found to lie
well outside of the currently proposed project boundary.
14 ]\
3. Record Search and Project Approach
The response by the NARC also indicated the presence of Native American cultural resource
sites within 0.5 mi. of the project area. Dave Singleton, of the NARC staff, responded that
known cultural resources have been documented in the area through the NARC Scared Lands
File search and recommendations were made by the NARC concerning the appropriate tribal
authorities to contact for a follow-up inquiries and consultation. For the current project the City
of Carlsbad will be the lead agency conducting direct tribal consultation.
Description of Previous Findings of SDI-17 ,672
SDI-17672 was first recorded by ASM in November of 2005 during a survey for the Interstate 5
widening project (Laylander and Palette 2006). During that survey, a shell scatter was found to
be mixed in with modem materials observed on the terrace just east of Interstate 5 and directly
south of Buena Vista Lagoon. During the 2005 survey, the site was noted as being located on
what appeared to be an abandoned parcel, with asphalt foundations and modem debris identified
on the surface. The small portion of the site lying within the Interstate 5 right-of-way was
subsequently tested by ASM (Laylander 2006) through the excavation of eight shovel test pits
and two 1 x 1 m units. These excavation units were placed in a single line parallel to Interstate 5.
The subsurface investigation at the time only recovered marine shell. The possible presence of
lithic flakes was noted in the 2006 survey report, but none were recovered during the subsequent
evaluation. Additionally, no intact cultural deposits were identified from the 2006 excavations by
ASM within the marginal portion of the site that was examined; the subsurface soil was noted as
having been highly disturbed by construction and rodent activity.
FIELD METHODS
Pedestrian Survey Methods
Undisturbed portions of the study area were subjected to a full-coverage survey conducted at 15
m transect intervals. Full-coverage survey, as it relates to this survey, is best defined as a 100
percent coverage involving systematic examination of blocks of terrain at a uniform level of
intensity. Standard global positioning systems (GPS) aided in navigation and a differential, post-
processed, decimeter-level GPS unit was to be used to record the location of site datums for any
newly discovered sites.
Survey efforts were to concentrate on searching for previously undocumented cultural resources.
The archaeologists were to record non-collected artifacts in the field to facilitate interpretations
of site character. ASM was to record any newly identified prehistoric and historic sites
associated with the project. A site was to be defined as any concentration of three or more
artifacts in a 25 m2 area. Site boundaries were to be defined when over 50 m of open space
separated artifact scatters. Isolated artifacts are defined as fewer than three artifacts in a 25 m2
area. ASM was to assign all cultural resources that meet the definition of archaeological sites
with temporary site numbers.
Site recording was to include the definition of site boundaries and documentation of features and
formed artifacts. Detailed sketch maps would demonstrate the relationship of the sites' locations
to topographic features and other landmarks. Site forms would contain detailed information on
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 15
3. Record Search and Project Approach
environmental context, artifact content and density, cultural affiliation, and function. ASM
would then complete California State Department ofParks and Recreation (DPR) 523 site forms
for submittal to the SCIC for assignment of primary numbers and site trinomials to newly
discovered sites. Recordation efforts would include the plotting of each site on USGS 7.5-minute
quad maps and the establishment of a GPS-recorded datum. Site forms would be included in the
draft and final reports as an appendix. Digital photographs would be taken to document the
environmental associations and the specific features of all sites, as well as the general character
of each survey area.
16
4. Results
4. RESULTS
The survey was conducted on September 21, 2012 by Tony Quach and Christine Lambert
(ASM). The project area was located on a heavily cultivated property specializing in the sale of
tropical plants, which included bird-of-paradise, ice plant, and commercial palms (Figure 4.1 ).
Dark tenting that sheltered the cultivated plants provided overhead shading for much of the
project area (Figure 4.2). Much of the project area was overlain with uniformly sized commercial
igneous gravel (Figure 4.3). Due to the erection of modem shade structures and gravel flooring
within the project area, visibility (around 5 percent) was limited to small, dispersed patches of
unobstructed surfaces and the outskirts of the property boundary where gravel was sparse or
absent. During the current survey, scattered bits of shell were observed in the northwest section
of the area where SDI-17,672 intersects the project boundary. Most ofthe encountered pieces of
shell were worn and nondiagnostic, but two intact pieces of shell were identified as Chione and
Argopecten (Figure 4.4). Besides th e several pieces of shell, no other cultural material was
identified.
The 2006 subsurface testing data for SDI-17,672 (Laylander 2006) was also examined to explore
the potential for intact subsurface cultural deposits. In the 2006 testing of the extreme
southwestern portion of SDI-17 ,672 , eight STPS and two units were placed in a north/south array
parallel to Interstate 5 (STP-1 farthest north and STP-8 farthest south). During the 2006 testing,
the subsurface contexts that were disturbed by modem debris were also noted. From the
examination of recovered shell weights and the recorded modem disturbances (Figure 4.5), it
appears that the relative shell amounts are generally sparse, with only an increase in abundance
as one nears the lagoon, and with modem subsurface disturbances apparent throughout.
Figure 4.1. Overview of the project area, facing west.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 17
4. Results
Figure 4.2. The interior portion of the nursery.
Figure 4.3. Igneous gravel that overlies most of the ground surface.
18
Figure 4.4.
Level
(embs)
0-20 em
20-40 em
40-60 em
60-80 em
Figure 4.5.
4. Results
Chione and Argopecten shells identified within the APE.
STP-1 STP-2 STP-3 STP-4 STP-5 STP-6 STP-7 STP-8 • 8.2* 0* 0* 0* 0* I 0.6* I 1.2* 0* • 12.2 I 0.7 0 I 1.3* I 0.5* I 4.8* I 1.9 0 -25.8 I 0.5 I 0.7 I 0.8* I 3.5* I 1.2* 0 I 1.3
0* 0* I 3.3* 0
The 2006 testing STP shell weight data (in g) arrayed by unit and depth. Asterisks
denote disturbed contexts.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 19
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
5.-I -.. ... -...
CEQA requires that all private and public activities not specifically exempted be evaluated
against the potential for environmental damage, including effects to historical resources.
Historical resources are recognized as part of the environment under CEQA. That act defines
historical resources as "any object, building, structure, site, area, or place which is historically
significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational,
social, political, military, or cultural annals of California," as cited in Division I, Public
Resources Code, Section 5021.1 [b].
Lead agencies have a responsibility to evaluate historical resources against the California
Register of Historical Resources (California Register) criteria prior to making a finding as to a
proposed project's impacts to historical resources. Mitigation of adverse impacts must be
considered if the proposed project will cause substantial adverse change. Substantial adverse
change includes demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an
historical resource would be impaired. While demolition and destruction are fairly obvious
significant impacts, it is more difficult to assess when change, alteration, or relocation crosses
the threshold of substantial adverse change. The CEQA Guidelines provide that a project that
demolishes or alters those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its
historical significance (i.e., its character-defining features) can be considered to materially impair
the resource's significance.
The California Register is used in the consideration of historic resources relative to significance
for purposes of CEQA. The California Register includes resources listed in, or formally
determined eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places, as well as some
California State Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest. Properties of local significance that
have been designated under a local preservation ordinance (local landmarks or landmark
districts), or that have been identified in a local historical resources inventory may be eligible for
listing in the California Register and are presumed to be significant resources for purposes of
CEQA unless a preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise.
Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant" if the
resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register, cited as Pub. Res. Code
SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852, consisting of the following:
( 1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patters of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of
California or the United States; or
(2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or
national history; or
(3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses
high artistic values; or
(4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the
prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 21
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
The goal of this study was to provide the BHA Inc. with a comprehensive inventory of any
potential cultural resources within the 5.4-acre Miles Pacific Subdivision Project through a
pedestrian surficial reconnaissance. A record search with the SCIC identified as single cultural
resource, SDI-17 ,672 as intersecting the project area. From reports of previous findings of this
site, it was found that the testing of the southwestern margin of SDI-17,672 produced small
amounts of shell within the subsurface, though modem debris were also noted that occur within
much of the levels. A Sacred Lands File search with the NAHC also indicated the presence of
known cultural resource within 0.5 mi. of the project area and a listing of Native American
contacts was provided for additional inquiry and consultation by the City of Carlsbad.
During the current survey ASM observed several pieces of shell in the northwestern portion of
the APE which is consistent with the previous site record for SDI-17,672, which characterized
this site as a sparse shell scatter. Though several pieces of shell were encountered in the
northwestern portion of the project area on the exposed portions of the surface, it is difficult to
definitively know whether this minimal presence of shell within the intersecting portion is
primarily derived from prehistoric activity or rather from modem disturbances as the banks of
Buena Vista Lagoon are less than 300 m to the north of the project area. Additionally, the sparse
presence of shell, when lacking other associated cultural materials, may not, in and of itself, be
indicative of the presence of significant cultural deposits. Nevertheless, this still does not
preclude the possibility for intact cultural deposits to exist below the surface. Overall as the
project area is partially developed for use as a plant nursery it is apparent that modem debris and
disturbances occurs throughout. From the current information, lacking additional data on the
subsurface character of the project area, cultural resource monitoring by a qualified archaeologist
and Native American monitor is recommended until further information can rule out the
potential presence of cultural resources.
22
References
REFERENCES
Byrd, Brian F.
1996 Coastal Archaeology of Las Flores Creek and Horno Canyon, Camp Pendleton,
California. ASM Affiliates, Encinitas, California. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District, California.
1997 Coastal Archaeology of SDI-1 0, 728, Las Flores Creek, Camp Pendleton, California.
ASM Affiliates, Encinitas, California. Submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Los Angeles District, California.
Byrd, Brian F., Drew Pallette, and Carol Serr
1995 Archaeological Testing along San Mateo and San Onofre Creeks, Northwestern
Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California. Brian F. Mooney Associates, San
Diego. Technical report on file, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District,
California.
Carrico, Richard L.
2008 Ethnohistory. In Prehistoric and Historic Archaeology of Metropolitan San Diego: A
Historic Properties Background Study, pp. 215-240. ASM Affiliates, Carlsbad,
California.
Chapman, Charles
1925 A History ofCalifornia: The Spanish Period. Macmillan Company, New York.
Fredericks, Edward
1979 The U.S. Navy in San Diego Prior to World War II. In They Came From the Sea: A
Maritime History of San Diego, Cabrillo Historical Association, San Diego.
Gallegos, Dennis R.
1985 Batiquitos Lagoon Revisited. San Diego State University Cultural Resource
Management Center Casual Papers 2(1):1-13.
1987 A Review and Synthesis of Environmental and Cultural Material for the Batiquitos
Lagoon Region. In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy, edited by
Dennis Gallegos, pp. 23-34. San Diego County Archaeological Society Research
PaperNo. 1.
1992 Patterns and Implications of Coastal Settlement in San Diego County: 9000 to 1300
Years Ago. In Essays on the Prehistory of Maritime California, edited by Terry L.
Jones, pp. 205-216. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publications No. 10.
University of California, Davis.
Kaldenberg, Russell L.
197 6 Paleo-Technological Change at Rancho Park North, San Diego County, California.
Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Diego State
University.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 23
References
1982 Rancho Park North: A San Dieguito-La Jolla Shellfish Processing Site in Coastal
Southern California. Imperial Valley College Museum Society Occasional Paper No.
6. El Centro, California.
Laylander Don
2006 Archaeological Evaluation Report for Nine Prehistoric Sites (CA-SDI-4553, -6831,-
7296, -12121, 13484, -16639, -17672, -17673, and -17928) on the Central San Diego
Coast, San Diego California. ASM Affiliates, Carlsbad, California.
Laylander, Don, and Drew Pallette
2006 Supplemental Archaeological Survey Report for the Interstate 5 Widening Project,
San Diego County, California. ASM Affiliates, Carlsbad, California.
Meighan, Clement W.
1954 A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology 10:215-227.
Moriarty, James R. III
1966 Cultural Phase Divisions Suggested by Typological Change Coordinated with
Stratigraphically Controlled Radiocarbon Dating at San Diego. Anthropological
Journal of Canada 4:20-30.
1969 The San Dieguito Complex: Suggested Environmental and Cultural Relationships.
Anthropological Journal of Canada 7(3):2-18.
Reddy, Seetha N., Barbara J. Giacomini, and Carol Serr
1996 Archaeological Testing in Between and Adjacent to CA-SDI-13,325, and CA-SDI-
13,324 Along San Mateo Creek, Northwestern Camp Pendleton, San Diego County,
California. Report on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State
University.
Robinson, W. W.
1942 The Southern California Real Estate Boom of the Twenties. Southern California
Quarterly 24(1):23-28.
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.
1945 An Outline ofYuman Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1:167-198.
1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West. Union-Tribune Publishing, San Diego.
Sparkman, Phillip
1908 The Culture of the Luiseno Indians. University of California Publications in
American Archaeology and Ethnology 8:188-234. Berkeley.
Shipek, Florence C.
1991 Delfina Cuero: Her Autobiography. BaHena Press, Menlo Park, California.
24
References
True, Delbert L.
1958 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity 23:255-263.
1966 Archaeological Differentiation of Shoshonean and Yuman Speaking Groups in
Southern California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology,
University of California, Los Angeles.
1970 Investigation of a Late Prehistoric Complex in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San
Diego County, California. Archaeological Survey Monographs No. 1. University of
California, Los Angeles.
True, D. L., and Eleanor Beemer
1982 Two Milling Stone Inventories from Northern San Diego County, California. Journal
of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:233-261.
True, D. L., and Paul D. Bouey
1990 Gladishill: A Probable San Dieguito Camp Near Valley Center, California. Journal of
New World Archaeology 7(4):1-28.
True, D. L., Clement W. Meighan, and Harvey Crew
1974 Archaeological Investigations at Molpa, San Diego County, California. University of
California Publications in Anthropology No. 11. Berkeley.
True, Delbert L., Rosemary Pankey, and Claude N. Warren
1991 Tom-Kav, a Late Village Site in Northern San Diego County, California, and Its
Place in the San Luis Rey Complex. Anthropological Records No. 30. University of
California, Berkeley.
True, Delbert L., and George Waugh
1982 Proposed Settlement Shifts During San Luis Rey Times: Northern San Diego,
California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:34-35.
Van Wormer, Stephen R., and Linda Roth
1985 Guns on Point Lorna: A History of Fort Rosecrans and the Defense of San Diego
Harbor. The Military on Point Lorna. Cabrillo Festival Historic Seminar, Cabrillo
Historical Association, San Diego.
Warren, Claude N.
1964 Cultural Change and Continuity on the San Diego Coast. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.
1966 The San Dieguito Type Site: Malcolm J. Rogers' 1938 Excavation on the San
Dieguito River. San Diego Museum Papers No. 5.
1967 The San Dieguito Complex - A Review and Hypothesis. American Antiquity 32:168-
185.
1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In
Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by Cynthia Irwin-Williams,
pp. 1-14. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 1.
Portales.
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 25
References
1987 The San Dieguito and La Jolla: Some Comments. In San Dieguito-La Jolla:
Chronology and Controversy, edited by Dennis Gallegos, pp. 73-85. San Diego
County Archaeological Society Research Paper No. 1.
Warren, Claude N., and D. L. True
1961 The San Dieguito Complex and its Place in California Prehistory. University of
California, Los Angeles, Archaeological Survey Annual Reports 1960-1961:246-338.
Warren, Claude N., D. L. True, and Ardith A. Eudey
26
1961 Early Gathering Complexes of Western San Diego County: Results and
Interpretations of an Archaeological Survey. University of California, Los Angeles,
Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1960-1961:1-106.
Appendices
APPENDICES
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS 27
Appendices
APPENDIX A
Native American Heritage Commission Letters
Miles Pacific Subdivision CRS
September 10, 2012
Dave Singleton
ASM
affiliates
archaeology
history
architectural history
ethnography
California Native American Heritage Division
915 Capitol MalL RM 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: Sacred Lands File and Native American Contacts List Request for the Miles Pacific
Subdivision, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California
Dear Mr. Singleton,
ASM Affiliates, Inc. (ASM) is conducting an archaeological study of the Miles Pacific
Subdivision project, located in Carlsbad California directly west of the intersection of Forest
Ave. and Pio Pico Drive. This study is being undertaken under the current framework in
compliance with CEQA. The current project will entail a one day pedestrian survey of the
proposed project parcel (approximately six acres in area). ASM has already conducted a
records search with the South Coast Information Center in San Diego County.
I am writing to place a request for a Sacred Lands File and Native American Contacts List
Request from the California Native American Heritage Commission in order to identify and
locate any previously documented cultural resources or areas of concern within the Miles
Pacific Subdivision Project area depicted below as a means to assess adverse affects the project
may have on cultural resources in the area. The search should include the project area and a
one-mile radius surrounding it. The project area is located on the 7.5 USGS Quadrangle of San
Luis Rey in an unsectioned portion of Township 11 South, Range 4 West. Attached to this
request are maps of the project area.
Our investigation will include direct consultation with local tribal entities in a manner that
ensures complete confidentiality. To facilitate this dialogue I would like to make a request for a
listing of the appropriate individuals to contact for this project. You can reply to me at the
ASM Carlsbad office, listed above or through any of the other means of contact listed below.
Feel free to call, write, Fax, or e-mail if you have any questions.
Thank you for your help in this endeavor.
2034 Corte del Nogal, Carlsbad, CA 92011 • 760~804~5757 • 760~804~5755~fax
260 S. Los Robles Ave., Suite 311, Pasadena, CA 91101 • 626~ 793~ 7395 • 626~ 793~2008~fax
120 Vine St., Reno, NV 89503 • 775~324-6789 • 775-324-9666-fax
www.asmaffiliates.com
Sincerely,
Tony T. Quach
Associate Archaeologist
ASM Affiliates Inc.,
2034 Corte del Nogal
Carlsbad, CA 92011
(760) 804-5757
tguach@asmaffiliates. com
Attachment:
Figure 1. Location map of the project area.
Figure 2. Vicinity map of the project area.
Figure 3. Google Earth Map of the Project Area
Page 2 of6
: ••• t
. . .
s.··.
· .. ..
. •
· ..
'
.•.
'-.:. ... '!>. · .. ,,, •. ... '\.. \. .
., : . :~~ .........
': .. ·. '... ' . ~ ·.·.·-.. ··:·\ ... \: ·.' •. Q ·. : :;·:-: .... :t .:. >· ;.
Cm·L~bad, C alifornia
San Luis Re::r 7 .5' tTSGS Quad
(1%8, photore,ised 1975)
S01h· 1:24.0000
E:JMiles P<Kitlc Subdivision
•••c::==•••••-r..,liles
0 0.25 0.5 1
••-==::~•••••Kilometers
0 0.2 5 0.5 I
N
A
Figure 1. Location map of the project area.
Page 3 of 6
.. · .... 0J ~-
· ... ~\J · : 5
~·~ ·~ .
. .. ·
Ca•·lsbad, Califomia
San Luis Rt':'. 7.5' USGS Quad
(19(>8, photort''i~ed 1975)
Scalt' 1:6,0000
c:J .Miles Pacitlc Subdivision
--=====---• Miles 0 0.05 0.1 0.2
-c::::J--hilometers
0 0.05 OJ 0.2
N
A
Figure 2. Vicinity map of the project area.
Page 4 of 6
Page 5 of 6
Figure 3. Google Earth Map of the Project Area
•'
Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
915 Capitol Mall, RM 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 653-4082
(916) 657-5390-Fax
nahc@pacbell.net
Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search
Project:
County:
USGS Quadrangle:
Quad Name:
Township: 11 S Range: 4 W
Company/Firm/ Agency:
Contact Person:
Street Address:
City:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Project Description:
Miles Pacific Subdivision Project
San Diego County
7.5 Minute USGS Quadrangle
San Luis Rey
Section(s): Unsectioned
ASM Affiliates Inc.
Tony Quach
2034 Corte del Nogal
Carlsbad. CA 92011
760-804-5757
760-804-5755
tquach@asmaffiliates.com
The Miles Division Subdivision Project proposes to subdivide a portion of the
Laguna Mesa Tract 7 property (-6 acres), currently located at 2373 Pio Pico
Drive, into 17 smaller residential subdivisions. The proposed construction
activities will then entail the removal the shaded awning encompassing the
greenhouse that currently comprises the majority of project area. Following the
removal of the awning and overhead utility structures. The cultivated vegetation
will be removed and the ground will be graded and trenched prior to the road
building through the central portion ofthe property in preparation for further
development planning.
Additional Location Information
Central UTM Point (NAD83):
Street Address of Project Area:
467759 m E and 3670433 m N
2373 Pio Pico Drive, Carlsbad CA
Page 6 of6
I _j
\
t' 09/11/2012 15:05 FAX 910 657 5300 NARC
~OF CA!IFQ8N~
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
916 CAPITOL MAll, ROOM 384
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 85~251
Fax (91 &) &57-5390
Wob Site www.nahc,ca..gov
d&_llllhc®IIIICboll.not
September 11, 2012
Mr. Tony T. Quach, Associate Archaeologist
ASM Affiliates~ Inc.
2034 Corte del Nogal
Carlsbad, CA 92011
Sent by FAX to::
No. of Pages:
760-804~5755
5
Edmund G_. Brown. Jr Oo_vpCD)U
Re: Sacred Lands File Search and Native American Contacts list for the proposed
Sacred lands File Search and Native American Contacts list for the proposed
''Miles Pacific Subdivision Project;" located in the City of Carlsbad: San Diego County,
California
Dear Mr. Quach:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a Sacred Lands
search based on the data provided and Native American cultural resource SIMS 1111@
· .within one-half mile of the project site, the 'area of potential effect' (e.g. APE):
you s · 1ed in any of the sections specified. Also the absence of archaeological fixtures
and other cultural resource items does not preclude their existence at the subsurface level.
In addition, please note; the NAHC Sacred Lands Inventory is not exhaustive and does not
preclude the discovery of cultural resources during any project groundbreaking activity ..
California Public Resources Code §§5097.94 (a) and 5097.96 authorize the NAHC
to establish a Sacred Land Inventory to record Native American sacred sites and burial
sites. These records are exempt from the provisions of the California Public Records Act
pursuant to. California Government Code §6254 (r). The purpose of this code is to protect
such sites from vandalism. theft and destruction.
laJOOl
In the 1985 Appellate Court decision (170 Cal App 3rd 604), the court held that the
NAHC has jurisdiction and special expertise. as a state agency, over affected Native American
resources, impacted by proposed projects including archaeological, places of religious
significance to Native Americans and burial sites
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA -CA Public Resources Code §§
21000-21177, amendments effective 3118/201 0) requires that any project that causes a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that Includes
archaeological resources. is a 'significant effect' requiring the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) per the CECA Guidelines defines a significant impact on the environment
as 'a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of physical conditions within
an area affected by the proposed project, including ... objects of historic or aesthetic
significance.h In order to comply with this provision, the lead agency is required to assess
whether the project will have an adverse Impact on these resources within the 'area of potential
..
• 09/11/2012 15:05 FAX 916 657 5390 1\AHC !i!)002
effect (APE), and if so, to mitigate that effect. CA Government Code §65040.12(e) defines
"environmental justice" provisions and is applicable to the environmental review processes.
Early consultation with Native American tribes in your area is the best way to avoid
unanticipated discoveries once a project is underway. Local Native Americans may have
knowledge of the religious and cultural significance of the historic properties of the proposed
project for the area (e.g. APE). Consultation with Native American communities is also a matter
of environmental justice as defined by California Government Code §65040.12(e). We urge
consultation with those tribes and interested Native Americans on the list that the NAHC has
ru;ovlded In order to see if your proposed project might impact Native American cultural
resources. Lead agencies should consider avoidance as defined in § 15370 of the CEQA
Guidelines when significant cultural resources as defined by the CEQA Guidelines §15064.5
(b)(c)(f) may be affected by a proposed project. If so, Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines
defines a significant impact on the environment as ~substantial," and Section 2183.2 which
requires documentation, data recovery of cultural resources.
The 1992 Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
were revised so that they could be applied to all historic resource types included In the National
Register of Historic Places and including cultural landscapes. Also, federal Executive Orders
Nos. 11593 {preservation of cultural environment), 13175 (coordination & consultation) and
13007 (Sacred Sites) are helpful, supportive guides for Section 106 consultation. The
aforementioned Secretary of the Interior's Standards Include recommendations for all 'lead
agencies' to consider the historic context of proposed projects and to "research• the cultural
landscape that might include the ·area of potential effect.'
Partnering with local tribes and Interested Native American consulting parties, on the
NAHC list, should be conducted in compliance with the requirements of federal NEPA (42 U.S.C
4321--43351) and Section 106 4(f), Section 110 and (k) of the federal NHPA (16 U.S.C. 470 et
seq), Section 4(f} of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (23 CFR 774); 36 CFR Part
800.3 (f) (2) & .5. the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CSQ, 42 U.S.C 4371 et
seq. and NAGPRA (25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) as appropriate. The 1992 Secretaryofthe Interiors
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Propetties were revised so that they could be applied to
all historic resource types Included In the National Register of Historic Places and including
cultural landscapes. Also, federal Executive Orders Nos. 11593 (preservation of cultural
environment), 13175 (coordination & consultation) and 13007 (Sacred Sites) are helpful,
supportive guides for Section 1 06 consultation. The NAHC remains concerned about the
limitations and methods employed for NHPA Section 106 Consultation.
Also, California Public Resources Code Section 6097.98, California Government Code
§27491 and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 provide for provisions for accidentally
discovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the processes to be
followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a project location other
than a 'dedicated cemetery', another important reason to have Native American Monitors on
board with the project.
To be effective. consultation on specific projects must be the result of an ongoing
relationship between Native American tribes and lead agenclesL project proponents and their
contractors, in the opinion of the NAHC. An excellent way to reinforce the relationship between
a project and local tribes is to employ Native American Monitors in all phases of proposed
projects Including the planning phases.
1.
.~ 09/11/2012 15:06 FAX 916 657 5390 NAHC IQ.I003
Confidentiality of "historic properties of religious and cultural significance" may also be
protected under Section 304 of he NHPA or at the Secretary of the Interior discretion if not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Secretary may also be
advised by the federal Indian Religious Freedom Act {cf. 42 U.S.C., 1996) in issuing a decision
on whether or not to disclose items of religious and/or cultural significance identified in or near
the APE and possibility threatened b roposed project activity.
out this response to your request. please do not hesitate to
Attachment
'
• ,"' 09/11/2012 15: 06 FAX 916 657 5390 NAHC ~004
Native American ConU~cts
San Diego County
September 11, 2012
Pala Band of Mission Indians
Historic Preservation Office/Shasta Gaughen
35008 Pala Temecula Road, Luiseno
Paia-• , CA 92059 Cupeno
PMB60
(760) 891-3515
sgaughen@palatribe.com
(760) 742·3189 Fax
Pauma & Yuima Reservation
Randall Majel, Chairperson
P.O. Box 369 Luiseno
Pauma Valley CA 92061
paurnareservatlon@aol.com
(760) 742-1289
(760) 742-3422 Fax
Pechanga Band of Mission Indians
Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources Manager
P.O. Box 1477 Luiseno
Temecula , CA 92593
(951) 77Q-8100
pmacarro@pechanga-nsn.
gov
(951) 506-9491 Fax
Rincon Band of Mission Indians
Vincent Whipple, Tribal Historic Preationv. Officer
P.O. Box 68 Luiseno
Valley Center. CA 92082
twolfe@ rincontribe.org
(760) 297-2635
(760) 297-2639 Fax
This list Ia currant only as of the date of this document.
Pauma Valley Band of Luisetio Indians
Bennae Calac, Tribal Council Member
P .0. Box 369 Luiseno
Pauma Valley CA 92061
bennaecalac@aol.com
(760) 617-2872
(760) 742-3422 -FAX
Rincon Band of Mission Indians
Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson
P .0. Box 68 Luiseno
Valley Center, CA 92082
bomazzetti@aol.com
(760) 749-1051
(760) 749-8901 Fax
San Pa~ual Band of Indians
Kristie Orosco, Environmental Coordinator
P.O. Sox 365 Luiseno
Valley Center, CA 92082 Diegueno
(760) 7 49-3200
councll@sanpasqualtribe.org
(760) 749-3876 Fax
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Department
1889 Sunset Drive Luiseno
Vista , CA 92081 Cupeno
760-724-8505
760-724-2172 -fax
Distribution of thl$ list does not relieve any penson of ths sbrtutory nJSpon9ibility as definod In Section 7050.6 of tho Health and safety Code,
Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 6097.98 of the Public Re&ources Coda.
This ll&t is applicable for contacting local NatJve Americxns with regard to cultural rosources for tho proposed
Mllea Pacific SubdiviSion Proj•c:t: located In Laguna Mesa area :located In thu City of Carlsbad for which a Sacred Lands File eearch
and Native American Contacts ll&t were l"'lquested.
r ..
'
..
,"' ., 09(11/2012 15:06 FAX 916 657 5390 NAHC ~005
La Jolla Band of Mission Indians
Lavonne Peck, Chahwoman
22000 Highway 76 Luiseno
Pauma Valley CA 92061
rob.roy@ lajolla-nsn.gov
(760) 7 42-3796
(760) 742-1704 Fax
Thi~ list 1$ curr&nt only as of the date of this document
Native American Contacts
San Diego County
September 11, 2012
Distribution of this list doe& notl'81iwe any person of the statutory f811pon&lbllity as defined In Section 7050.5 of the H&alth and Safety Code,
Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources COde and Section 5097.98 ofthe Public R98oun:es Code.
This list is 111ppllcable for contacting local Native Americana with regard 10 culturall'$$0un:es for the proposed
Miles PacHl~ 8ubdlvi$1on Project; loeated In Laguna Mesa area ; located In tho City of C8rl$bad for which a Sacred Lands File search
and Native American Contacts list were reqi.I8Btod.