7.5_D-Cultural Resources Assessment.pdf — Moreno Valley City Council, June 3, 2025

Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Town Center at Moreno Valley
Project
City of Moreno Valley, California

PREPARED FOR:

Lewis Management Corporation
Joseph Edwards, Regional Vice President
1156 N. Mountain Avenue
Upland, California 91786
909.579.1236

PREPARED BY:

VCS Environmental
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
Contact: Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA
Director, Cultural Services
949.489.2700

November 2024

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 i Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Management Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.0 Undertaking Information/Introduction................................ ................................ .................... 7

1.1 Contracting Data ...................................................................................................... 7

1.2 Undertaking ............................................................................................................. 7

1.3 Project Location ....................................................................................................... 7

1.4 Project Personnel ...................................................................................................... 7

2.0 Regulatory Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 8

2.1 California Environmental Quality Act ........................................................................... 8

2.2 Assembly Bill (AB) 52 ................................................................................................. 9

2.3 Senate Bill (SB) 18 ....................................................................................................10

2.4 Human Remains ......................................................................................................10

3.0 Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 11

3.1 Natural ...................................................................................................................11

3.2 Cultural ..................................................................................................................11

3.2.1 Prehistory ..................................................................................... 11

3.2.2 Ethnography ................................................................................. 12

3.2.3 History ......................................................................................... 14

4.0 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 17

4.1 Cultural Resources Records Search .............................................................................17

4.2 Paleontological Resources Records Search ..................................................................17

4.3 Historic Aerial Review ...............................................................................................17

4.4 Native American Scoping..........................................................................................17

4.5 Field Survey ............................................................................................................17

5.0 Results ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 18

5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search .............................................................................18

5.1.1 Studies ......................................................................................... 18

5.1.2 Resources ..................................................................................... 18

5.2 Paleontological Resources Records Search ..................................................................19

5.3 Historic Aerial Review ...............................................................................................20

5.4 Native American Scoping..........................................................................................20

5.5 Field Survey ............................................................................................................21

6.0 Management Considerations ................................ ................................ ................................ . 23

7.0 Findings and Recommendations ................................ ................................ ............................ 24

7.1 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 24

8.0 Certification ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 28

9.0 References ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 29

TO WN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 ii Ta ble of Contents

LIST OF TABLES
Pa ge
Table 1 Cultural Resources Studies Within the Project Site ........................................................................ 18 Table 2 Cultural Resources within One-Half Mile of the Project Site .......................................................... 18 Table 3 Additional Cultural Resources within One-Mile of the Project Site ................................................ 19

LIST OF FIGURES
Follows Page
1 Pr
oject Site Quadrangle .................................................................................................................... 7 2 Project site Aerial ............................................................................................................................. 7

ATTACHMENTS
A
B
C
D
Cultural Resources Records Search (EIC)
Paleontological Resources Records Search (WSC)
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
Personnel Qualifications

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

National Archaeological Database (NADB) Information Sheet

Cultural Resources Assessment for the
Town Center at Moreno Valley Project
Moreno Valley, California

by
Patrick Maxon, M.A., RPA

November 2024

Submitted by:

Patrick Maxon M.A., RPA
VCS Environmental
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
T: (949) 489-2700

Submitted to:

Joseph Edwards, Regional Vice President
Lewis Management Corporation
1159 N. Mountain Avenue
Upland, California 91786
909.579.1236

USGS Sunnymead, CA 7.5-Minute Quadrangle; Township 3 South; Range 3 West, Section 9 (S.B.B.M).

Project area: 70.27 acres

Investigation: Literature review, pedestrian field survey, Tribal scoping

Key Words: EIC, WSC, NAHC, The Mellor House (P-33-007277)

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 1 Management Summary

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
Purpose and Scope
VCS Environmental (VCS) undertook this study under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements for the proposed Town Center at Moreno Valley Project (Project) in the City of Moreno Valley.

This cultural resources investigation will meet the City of Moreno Valley’s requirement for cultural and paleontological resources for its Project application package. This Phase I Cultural Resources Study wa s designed to identify cultural resources that may be present within the Project area (includes the Project site and off-site improvement areas).

The format of this report follows Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format (Office of Historic Preservation 1990).

Dates of Investigation
A cultural resources literature review was completed by staff at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside on August 19, 2021, (Attachment A). A paleontological resources literature review was completed by Darla Radford at the We stern Science Center (WSC) on July 7, 2021 (Attachment B). A Sacred Lands File search was requested of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on June 22, 2021 (Attachment C). A cultural resources survey of the property was conducted by VCS Director of Cultural Services, Patrick Maxon, RPA on June 29, 2021. This report was completed in November 2024.

Investigation Constraints
The Project area is free of any structures and was recently partially disked and partially cleared of ruderal vegetation. Approximately one-half of the area was not cleared, leaving the remainder covered in dried, annual grasses in a checkerboard grid pattern. Approximately 50-60% of the ground surface is visible.

Findings of Investigation
Implementation of the proposed Project would not adversely affect any known significant historical resources. The area, however, is known to contain historical resources - 21 prehistoric sites within one-mile of the Project area; therefore, mitigation measures are recommended. • The EIC records search identified 14 cultural resources recorded within one-half-mile of the Project area. One resource (P -33-007277)-the Mellor House -is recorded within the Project site. It is, however, no longer extant on the Project site. Extant non-native trees (Pepper) associated with the house are not considered significant resources. Eight of the resources within one -half mile are prehistoric milling slicks.
• Sixteen additional cultural resources (13 are prehistoric) are located within a one-mile radius of the Project area. This information was provided by Molly Earp of Pechanga. • Eighteen cultural resources studies have previously been completed within one -half mile of the Project area. One of these studies (RI-02171) includes a portion of the current Project area. • The NAHC Sacred Lands File search and field survey were negative. • The Project area is covered by paleontologically sensitive fluvial fan deposits dating from the early Pleistocene to Holocene (Qvoa and Qyf).

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 2 Management Summary
Management Considerations
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form, which includes, for Section V. Cultural Resources, questions relating to cultural resources, including the historic built environment, historic and prehistoric archaeology, and human remains, and a paleontological question included in Section VII, Geology and Soils.

The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been used as significance criteria. Accordingly, a project may result in a significant environmental impact if:
• The Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5.
• The Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5.
• The Project would disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines Section VII, Geology and Soils , includes an additional question related to the presence or absence of fossil resources on the Project area. Accordingly, a project may result in a significant environmental impact if:
• The Project would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines Section XVII, Tribal Cultural Resources , includes additional questions related to the presence or absence of Tribal Cultural Resources within the Project area. They are as follows:
• Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

The purpose of the cultural resources assessment is to identify historical/cultural resources that may exist within the Project area , to determine the sensitivity of the Project area for the presence of buried archaeological material, and to make recommendations to the lead agency regarding the development of mitigation measures to reduce the impacts of the Project on resources to a less than significant level.

Public Resources Code (PRC) §21084.1-2 and PRC §5020.1(q) of CEQA states that a project that may cause a substantial adverse change (i.e., demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impai red) in the significance of a “historical resource” or a “tribal cultural resource” is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 3 Management Summary
Summary and Recommendations
An examination of historic aerial photographs (NETRONLINE n.d.) revealed that the majority of the Project area has not been developed. One structure (The Mellor House) was present in the southeast corner of the site before 1966, the earliest available aerial photograph. A large mound of sediment was placed in this location after 1985 and before 1997. It extends some 900 feet to the north along Nason Street. It appears that the Mellor House was removed prior to the placement of the fill.

Eight prehistoric milling slicks are recorded within one -half mile of the Project area , attesting to the prehistoric presence of indigenous populations in the vicinity. An additional 13 prehistoric sites were identified by the Pechanga (Molly Earp) within one-mile of the Project area.

The entire Project area is covered by paleontologically sensitive fluvial fan deposits dating from the early Pleistocene to Holocene.

Implementation of the proposed Project including off-site improvements would not adversely affect any existing known cultural resources. However, because the area is known to contain resources and it is paleontologically sensitive, archaeological and paleontological monitoring is recommended during ground disturbing activities.

Mitigation Measures

ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Based on the data presented above and pending the discretion of the lead agency and the results of AB 52 and SB 18 consultation, it is recommended that archaeological and Native American monitoring occur during Project excavations into native, Holocene-age sediments:

CR-1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall retain a professional archaeologist to conduct monitoring of all mass grading and trenching activities. The Project Archaeologist shall have the authority to temporarily redirect earthmov ing activities in the event that suspected archaeological resources are unearthed during Project construction. The Project Archaeologist, in consultation with the Consulting Tribe(s), the contractor, and the City, shall develop a Cultural Resources Managem ent Plan (CRMP) in consultation pursuant to the definition in AB52 to address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. A consulting tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB 52 tribal consultation process for the Project, has not opted out of the AB52 consultation process, and has completed AB 52 consultation with the City as provided for in Cal Pub Res Code Section 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52. Details in the Plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling;
b. The Project archeologist and the Consulting Tribes(s) as defined in CR -1 shall attend the pre- grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and any contractors and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training for those in attendance. The Training will include a brief review of the cultural sensitivity of the Project and the surrounding area; what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; th e protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. All new

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 4 Management Summary
construction personnel that will conduct earthwork or grading activities that begin work on the Project following the initial Training must take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior to beginning work and the Project archaeologist and Consulting Tribe(s) shall make themselves available to provide the training on an as-needed basis; c. The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s) and Project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subje ct to a cultural resources evaluation.

CR-2: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall secure an agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians regarding monitoring during ground- disturbing activities.

The Developer is also required to provide a minimum of 30 days advance notice to the tribe of all mass grading and trenching activities. The Native American Tribal Representative shall have the authority to temporarily halt and redirect earth moving activities in the affected area in the event that suspected archaeological resources are unearthed. If the Native American Tribal Representative suspect that an archaeological resource may have been unearthed, the Project Archaeologist or the Tribal Representative shall immediately redirect grading operations in a 100-foot radius around the find to allow identification and evaluation of the suspected resource. In consultation with the Native American Tribal Representative, the Project Archaeologist shall evaluate the suspected resource and make a determination of significance pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.

CR-3: In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during the course of grading (inadvertent discoveries), the following procedures shall be carried out for final disposition of the discoveries:
a. One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be employed with the tribes. Evidence of such shall be provided to the City of Moreno Valley Planning Department:
i. Preservation-In-Place of the cultural resources, if feasible. Preservation in place means avoiding the resources, leaving them in the place they were found with no development affecting the integrity of the resources. ii. Onsite reburial of the discovered items as detailed in the treatment plan required pursuant to Mitigation Measure CR -1. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts in perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all legally required cataloging and basic recordation have been completed. A confidential exhibit will be prepared. No recordation of sacred items is permitted without the written consent of all Consulting Native American Tribal Government s as defined i n
C
R-1.

CR-4: The City shall verify that the following note is included on the Grading Plan:
“If any suspected archaeological resources are discovered during ground -disturbing activities and the Project Archaeologist or Native American Tribal Representatives are not present, the construction supervisor is obligated to halt work in a 100 -foot radius around the find and call the Project Archaeologist and the Tribal Representative to the site to assess the significance of the find.”

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 5 Management Summary
CR-5: If potential historic or cultural resources are uncovered during excavation or construction activities at the project site, work in the affected area must cease immediately and a qualified person meeting the Secretary of the Interior's standards (36 CFR 61), Tribal Representatives, and all site monitors per the Mitigation Measures, shall be consulted by the City to evaluate the find, and as appropriate recommend alternative measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate negative effects on the historic, or prehistoric resource. Determinations and recommendations by the consultant shall be immediately submitted to the Planning Division for consideration, and implemented as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, in consultation with any and all Consulting Native American Tribes as defined in CR-1 before any further work commences in the affected area.

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The records search from the WSC determined that paleontologically sensitive fluvial fan deposits dating from the early Pleistocene to Holocene are present at the surface of the Project area. Any excavations in these sediments may encounter significant fossils, therefore, full -time paleontological monitoring of ground disturbing activities is recommended.

PR-1: Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or action that would permit Project site disturbance, the Applicant shall provide written evidence to the City of Moreno Valley that the Applicant has retained a qualified Paleontologist to observe grading activities into the paleontologically sensitive fluvial fan deposits and to conduct salvage excavation of paleontological resources as necessary. Sediment samples should also be recovered to determine the small-fossil potential of the site. The Paleontologist shall be present at the pre- grading conference; shall establish procedures and a schedule for paleontological resources surveillance; and shall establish, in cooperation with the City, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of the fossils as appropriate. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the City of Moreno Valley.

PR-2: The Project Paleontologist shall prepare a final paleontological resource s monitoring and mitigation report of findings and significance, including lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and graphics to accurately record their original location(s). All recovered fossils will be offered for curation in perpetuity to the Western Science Center in Hemet, the principal fossil repository in Riverside County. A letter documenting receipt and acceptance of all fossil collections by the receiving institution must be included in the final report. The report, when submitted to (and accepted by) the City of Moreno Valley, shall signify satisfactory completion of the project program to mitigate impacts to any nonrenewable paleontological resources.

REGULATORY REQUIREMENT
Project-related earth disturbance has the potential to unearth previously undiscovered human remains, resulting in a potentially significant impact. If human remains are unintentionally disturbed during archaeological excavations or construction activities, implementation of the procedures set forth in PRC Section 5097.98 and California State Health and Safety Code 7050.5 would be implemented in consultation with the MLD as identified by the NAHC. California State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours. The NAHC shall identify the MLD with whom consultation shall occur to determine the treatment and disposition of the remains.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 6 Management Summary
Disposition of Data
This report will be filed with the City of Moreno Valley, Joseph Edwards at Lewis Management Corp; VCS; and at the EIC. All field notes and other documentation related to the study are on file at VCS, San Juan Capistrano.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 7 Undertaking Information/Introduction

1.0 UNDERTAKING INFORMATION/INTRODUCTION

1.1 Contracting Data
Lewis Management Corp retained VCS Environmental (VCS) to conduct a Phase I cultural resources study for the proposed Project. This report details the findings of the investigation and offers management recommendations and mitigation measures to evaluate a ny discoveries and to reduce the impact of the Project on resources to a less than significant level.

1.2 Undertaking
Lewis Management Corp is proposing to construct residential and commercial uses on the Project site at the northwest corner of Alessandro Boulevard and Nason Street and extending north to Cottonwood Avenue, City of Moreno Valley, California. The Project site is located on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 487-470-030 and 487- 470-031. Site-adjacent roadway improvements would also be constructed, and a storm drain line would be installed for approximately 650 -feet along Alessandro Boulevar d west of the Project site. The Project impact area encompasses 70.27 acres.

1.3 Project Location
The Project site is located north of Alessandro Boulevard, south of Cottonwood Avenue, east of an existing residential neighborhood, and west of Nason Street in Moreno Valley, Riverside County. Figure 1 depicts the regional and specific location of the Pro ject site on a portion of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS’) Sunnymead 7.5-minute quadrangles, in Section 9 of Township 3 South; Range 3 West (S.B.B.M). Figure 2 depicts the Project area in an aerial photograph.

1.4 Project Personnel
Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA , requested the literature review at the EIC, completed the field survey, contacted the NAHC, and authored this report. Refer to Attachment D for qualifications.

Map Created: Dec 2021
Data Source: ESRI, USGS
Moreno Valley Town Center
USGS Topographic Map
Prepared By:

VCS Environmental
Figure 1
Project Site

7.5-Minute Quadrangle: Sunnymead
Section: 9
Township & Range: T3S R3W
Meridian: San Bernardino
County: Riverside1:24,000
I
0 1,200 2,400
Feet
CJ
.

I
• ·••O-
1~
t'!-
,,,-.,.--._·-~--.JL--·~-- .. ....._ ___ ,.._.-
/ ,..

F''"'<:i.a-----~• A• V•£•--~/
-·✓s✓o)
··, ........... _ ... __
( .•
J
, . "' l ,... ... --- ••• .. ~ ,,,,,.. ....
,·
1:10,000
Map Created: December 2021
Data Source: ESRI
Town Center at Moreno Valley
Aerial Map
Prepared By:

VCS Environmental
Figure 2
Project Site
²
0 500 1,000
Feet
~~(!ll
~
' I
· , .
' ~©
• .. ~ I
~ ~
•
~ lill7iJ
~lil'!i::>

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 8 Regulatory Setting

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING
This section contains a discussion of the applicable laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards that govern cultural resources and must be adhered to both prior to and during Project implementation. The report is intended to satisfy the requirements of t he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regulations (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] §15064.5 and California Public Resources Code [PRC] §21083.2). It is assumed that there is no federal action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NE PA) and thus no cultural resources analysis is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 United States Code [USC] 470f) and its implementing regulations at 36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800, Protection of Historic Properties).

2.1 California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project would have a significant effect on one or more historical resources. According to Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a “historical resource” is defined as a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (PRC §21084.1); a resource included in a local register of historical resources (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR], §15064.5[a][2]); or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (14 CCR §15064.5[a][3]).

Section 5024.1 of the PRC, Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), and Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the CEQA Statutes were used as the basic guidelines for the cultural resources study. PRC 5024.1 requires evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Th e purposes of the CRHR are to maintain listings of the State’s historical resources and to indicate which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change.

The criteria for listing resources in the CRHR, which were expressly developed to be i n accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (per the criteria listed at 36 CFR §60.4) are listed below.

The quality of significance in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California is present in any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manus cript that possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association and that:
(a) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; or (b) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; or (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.

According to Section 15064.5(a)(3)(A–D) of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), a resource is considered historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing in the NRHP (per the criteria listed at 36 CFR 60.4).

Impacts that affect those characteristics of the resource that qualify it for the NRHP or that would adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered to have a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to cultural resources from the proposed Project are thus considered significant if the Project: (1) physically destroys or damages all or part of a resource; (2) changes

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 9 Regulatory Setting
the character of the use of the resource or physical feature within the setting of the resource that contributes to its significance; or (3) introduces visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of significant features of the resource.

The purpose of a cultural resources investigation is to evaluate whether any cultural resources remain exposed on the surface of the Project area or whether any cultural resources can reasonably be expected to exist in the subsurface. If resources are discovered, management recommendations would be required for evaluation of the resources for CRHR eligibility.

Broad mitigation guidelines for treating historical resources are codified in Section 15126.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. To the extent feasible, public agencies should seek to avoid significant effects to historical resources, with preservation in place be ing the preferred alternative. If not feasible, a data recovery plan shall be prepared to guide subsequent excavation. Mitigation for historical resources such as buildings, bridges, and other structures that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interi or’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Weeks and Grimmer 1995) will generally be considered mitigated below a level of significance.

2.2 Assembly Bill (AB) 52
This Project is subject to the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52. AB 52 is applicable to projects that have filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or notice of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or Negative Declaration (ND) on or after July 1, 2015. The law requires lead agencies to initiate consultation with California Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the P roject and have requested such consultat ion, prior to determining the type of CEQA documentation that is applicable to the P roject (i.e., EIR, MND, ND).

Significant impacts to “tribal cultural resources” are considered significant impacts to the environment.

For “tribal cultural resources,” PRC §21074, enacted and codified as part of a 2014 amendment to CEQA through Assembly Bill 52, provides the statutory definition as follows:
“Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:

1. Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:

A. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.

B. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.

2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

To determine if such resources exist, under AB 52 lead agencies must consult with tribes that request consultation and must make a reasonable and good faith effort to mitigate the impacts of a development on such resources to a less than significant level. AB52 allows tribes 30 days after receiving notification to request consultation and the lead agency must then initiate consultation within 30 days of the request by tribes.

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 10 Regulatory Setting

2.3 Senate Bill (SB) 18
Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) (California Government Code Section 65352.3) sets forth requirements for local governments to consult with Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal cultural places through local land use planning. The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early stage of planning for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts on, cultural places. The Tribal Consultation Guidelines: Supplement to General Plan Guidelines (OPR 2005), identifies the following contact and notification responsibilities of local governments:
• Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local government must notify the appropriate tribes (on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission [NAHC]) of the opportunity to conduct consultations for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places located on land within the local government’s jurisdiction that is affected by the proposed plan adoption or amendment. Tribes have 90 days from the date on which they receive notification to request consultation, unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe (Government Code Section 65352.3). • Prior to the adoption or substantial amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local government must refer the proposed action to those tribes that are on the NAHC contact list a nd
h
ave traditional lands located within the city or county’s jurisdiction. The referral must allow a 45- day comment period (Government Code Section 65352). Notice must be sent regardless of whether prior consultation has taken place. Such notice does not initiate a new consultation process.
• Local government must send a notice of a public hearing, at least 10 days prior to the hearing, to tribes who have filed a written request for such notice (Government Code Section 65092).

2.4 Human Remains
Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code provides for the disposition of accidentally discovered human remains. Section 7050.5 states that, if human remains are found, no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains.

Section 5097.98 of the PRC states that, if remains are determined by the Coroner to be of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the NAHC within 24 hours which , in turn, must identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The descendants shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The designated Native American representative would then determine, in consultation with the property owner, the disposition of the human remains.

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 11 Setting

3.0 SETTING

3.1 Natural
The Project site consists of a flat field devoid of any substantial vegetation save for dried annual grasses.

The topography of the Project site slopes gently to the south with an elevation of approximately 1,640 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the north at Cottonwood Avenue, to approximately 1 ,590 above msl in the south at Alessandro Boulevard.

3.2 Cultural

3.2.1 Prehistory
The prehistory of western Riverside County can be understood as the transition area between coastal and desert subsistence patterns. Earlier studies (Kroeber 1925, Moratto 1984, Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984, et al.) were comprehensive and statewide; however, they were published before and when California contract archaeology was in its infancy and considerable archaeology has been completed in the area since that time. Progress has also been made in addressing the regional research questions posed by earlie r researchers. The following chronology, based on that of Erlandson and Colton (1991) is presented in Jones and Klar (2007) - a recent reevaluation and generalized chronology of California prehistory. The following is a summary of Chapter 14 of that book (Byrd and Raab 2007). It describes cultural traits in the southern California Bight (extending from Point Conception to the Mexican border), from ocean to desert.

Early Holocene (11,600 – 7,600 BP). California’s first inhabitants have traditionally been thought of as big game hunters who lived at the end of the last ice -age (~11,000 years before present [BP]). As the environment warmed and dried, the large Ice Age fauna vanished, marking the end of the Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition (WPLT) characterized by large pluvial (rainfall-fed) lakes, streams, marshes, and grasslands exploited by native populations whose sites are generally found along their shores (Moratto 1 984).

Populations responded by exploiting a much wider range of flora and fauna to replace the large mammals.

This traditional model has been tested by the past three decades of archaeological research. Current models suggest a much more complex situation; most dramatically illustrated at coastal sites. The Paleocoastal Tradition (PCT) reflects a coastal adaptation of the WPLT (Davis et al. 1969). PCT sites are also located along bays and estuaries, exploiting mollusks, sea mammals, sea birds, and fish in addition to land plants and animals. Habitation on San Miguel Island has been identified as early as ~11,300 BP at Daisy Cave and ~8,500 BP at Eel Point on San Clemente Island (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Middle Holocene (7,600 – 3,650 BP). The Middle Holocene has been thought of as a time of cultural change where early Holocene cultures morphed over time into the Late Holocene cultures. This “Millingstone Horizon” (Wallace 1955) in coastal southern California suggests a shift in subsistence strategies - to the gathering and processing of plant seeds, grasses and shellfish as the primary dietary staple, with fishing and the hunting of smaller animals playing a less important role. Large habitation sites are seen in inland areas.

Occupation revolved around seasonal and semi -sedentary movements in coastal Orange and San Diego counties. Geographic movement through trade networks are postulated by the presence of Olivella grooved rectangle shell beads as far north as central Oregon dating to 4900- 3500 BP (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Characteristics of the middle Holocene sites include ground stone artifacts (manos and metates) used for processing plant material and shellfish, flexed burial beneath rock or milling stone cairns, flaked core or cobble tools, dart points, cogstones, discoidals, and crescentics.

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 12 Setting
Late Holocene (3,650 – 233 BP). Traditional models of this period maintained that the cultural systems encountered by European explorers in the late 18th century were formed during this time. These cultures were said to have access to rich resources (particularly the acorn), invented the bow and arrow, the mortar and pestle, introduced ceramics, and altered mortuary behaviors from inhumations to cremations. These groups were often elevated to utopian levels by earlier researchers (Raab and Jones 2004).

This period is now also recognized to have been one of more complex local and regional patterns of change that occurred at differing times within the region. Byrd and Raab (2007) suggest that cultures in southern California over-exploited high-ranked food items such as shellfish, fish, terrestrial and marine mammals, and plant remains. This, and climatic fluctuations, led to resource depression, which necessitated a shift to less desirable, more costly resources.

The “Takic Wedge” migration of Takic speakers from the Great Basin into southern California occurred during this period. It should be noted that many Tribal creation stories assert that native peoples were always in this area and no migration actually occurred.

3.2.2 Ethnography
According to maps prepared in Bean (1978:576), Bean and Shipek (1978:551), and others the Project area is located within or near the traditional territory of the Luiseño, Cahuilla, and Gabrielino. This area was likely a shared area or at least one visited by all three tribes.

LUISEÑO
The project is located within the ethnographic territory of the Luiseño. The Luiseño are Takic speakers and are descended from Late Prehistoric populations of the region. Takic is part of the larger Uto -Aztecan language stock which migrated west from the G reat Basin (Bean and Smith 1978, Shipley 1978). It should be noted that Luiseño origin stories assert that their development occurred in situ, meaning the people were always here and the migration hypothesis is, according to the Luiseño, false.

The Luiseño share many similar cultural traits to many other southern California groups. The Luiseño lived in sedentary and independent village groups, each with specific subsistence territories encompassing hunting, food gathering, and fishing areas. Villages were usually located in valley basins, along creeks and streams adjacent to mountain ranges where water was available and where the villages would be protected from environmental conditions and potential enemies. Most inland populations had access to fishing and food gathering sites on the coast (Bean and Shipek 1978).

Luiseño economic and subsistence practices centered upon the seasonal gathering of acorns and seeds; the hunting of deer and small mammals such as rabbits, wood rats, ground squirrels, and birds. Coastal foods included sea mammals, fish and shellfish. Tool technologies were organized around food collection, storage, and preparation strategies, which was reflected in the type, size, and quantity of food items gathered. Stone (lithic) tools included two types: ground stone and flaked stone tools. Ground stone equipment included: mortars, pestles, manos and metate grinding slicks, made from granite, schist, and gneiss. Flaked tools included: bifaces, projectile points, scrapers, and gravers, fabricated from siliceous rock such as chert and jasper, microcrystalline chalcedony, obsidian, fine grain ingenious rocks such as basalt rhyolite, and andesite, and hard silica such as quarts and quartzite. Utilitarian tools were constructed from wood, animal bones, skins, and/or woven from flora materials depending on need (Lovin 1963). Hunting activities were conducted both on an individual basis and/or organized into group activities, depending on seasonal factors and the game hunted. Acorns encompassed as much 50 percent of the Luiseño diet (White 1963). Acorns provided a reliable and abundant food source that was high in calories and could be easily

T OWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 13 Setting
stored for future use. Acorn collection was a central tenant in the lives of the Luiseños and dominated their economic and social structure (Basgall 1987, Johnson and Earle 1987).

Villages were organized around an inherited chief who exerted sole control over the economy, religious rituals, and territorial matters within the village (Bean and Shipek 1978:555). The chief at times would consult with a council of elders and shamans on matters of religious practices and on environmental conditions effecting village life. Large villages may have had a complex behavioral and political structure due to their territorial size and economic control, while the smaller villages’ political complexity was limited by their territorial size (Strong 1929; Bean and Shipek 1978:555).

CAHUILLA
The Cahuilla are an ethnographic Native American group descended from Late Prehistoric Takic -speaking inhabitants of the region. The name Cahuilla is believed to have originated from the group’s word káwiya for “master” or “boss” (Bean 1978:575).

The territory of the Cahuilla has been described as topographically diverse, “from the summit of the San Bernardino Mountains in the north to Borrego Springs and the Chocolate Mountains in the south, a portion of the Colorado Desert west of Orocopia Mountain to the east, and the San Jacinto Plain near Riverside and the eastern slopes of Palomar Mountain to the west” (Bean 1978:575). Three main divisions of the Cahuilla—Desert, Pass (or Western), and Mountain groups —were defined mainly by geographic distribution, but dialectic differentiation was apparent (Strong 1929). A network of trails linking Cahuilla villages and those of neighboring groups, including the Luiseño, facilitated trade and maintenance of social ties.

The Cahuilla were hunter -gatherers who followed a seasonal round of utilizing various floral and faunal resources occurring in their territory (Bean 1972, 1978; Bean and Saubel 1972). Because Cahuilla territory was comprised of high mountains and arid lowlands, their seasonal round has been characterized as vertical rather than horizontal, with people moving upward and downward in layers of ecological zones ordered by elevation (Bean 1972). Settled villages were located near reliable water sources and within range of various resources (food, wood for fuel, and lithic materials for tools). Each village was composed of a group of individuals that were related by blood or marriage and which retained its own specific hunting and resource collecting areas. Cahuilla lineage groups were linked together in a complex interaction sphere of trade, alliance, intermarriage, and ceremonial exchange with neighboring groups including the Luiseño.

Major villages were fully occupied during winter, but during other seasons task groups headed out in periodic forays to collect available plant foods, with larger groupings from several villages organizing for annual acorn harvests. Bean and Saubel (1972) have recorded several hundred species of plants used by the Cahuilla for food, utilitarian materials, and medicines. Major plant foods emphasized during late prehistory included acorns, mesquite, screwbean, pinyon nuts, and various seed- producing legumes that were complemented by agave, wild fruits and berries, tubers, cactus bulbs, roots, and greens. Hunting was accomplished with the throwing stick and bow and arrow; nets and traps were also used for small animals (Bean 1972). Stone tools consisted of two general types: ground stone tools (e.g., mortars, pestles, manos, and metates for pounding and grinding) and flaked stone tools (e.g., knives, drills, and projectile points for cutting and piercing). Ground stone tools were typically made from granite or o ther coarse stone. Flaked stone tools were typically made from chert, jasper, basalt, quartz, quartzite, obsidian, and other fine - grained stone in which breakage patterns could be controlled and sharp edges would result.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 14 Setting

GABRIELINO/TONGVA/KIZH
At the time of European contact in 1769, when Gaspar de Portolá’s expedition crossed the Los Angeles Basin, what were to be named the Gabrielino Native Americans by the Spanish occupied the area to the west of the Project area (Kroeber 1925; Bean and Shipek 1978; Bean and Smith 1978; McCawley 1996).

While the term Gabrielino identifies those Native Americans who were under the control of the Spanish Mission San Gabriel Archángel, the overwhelming number of people in these areas were of the same ethnic nationality and language (Takic) group. Their territory extended from northern Orange County north to the San Fernando Valley in Los Angeles County and eastward to the San Bernardino area.

This and the following ethnographic information relate to currently surviving native peoples still living in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. They maintain their cultural practices and customs. The current Gabrielino Tribe comprises at least five bands that are recognized Tribes by the State of California (they do not, however, enjoy Federal recognition). They include the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation; the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; the Gabrieleno- Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; the Gabrielino -Tongva Tribe; and the Gabrielino/Tongva Nation. The terms the Native Americans in Southern California used to identify themselves have, for the most part, been lost; therefore, the names do not necessarily identify specific ethnic or Tribal groups. Some currently refer to themselves as Tongva, while others prefer the term Kizh. For the sake of clarity and consistency, the term Gabrielino will be used for the remainder of this section.

As described above, from an archaeological perspective, the Gabrielino arrived in the Los Angeles Basin possibly as early as 1,500 BCE as part of the so-called Shoshonean (Takic speaking) Wedge from the Great Basin region (Sutton 2010). The Gabrielino gradually displaced the indigenous peoples, who were probably Hokan speakers. Large, permanent villages were established in the fertile lowlands along rivers and streams and in sheltered areas along the coast. Eventually, Gabrielino territory encompassed the g reater Los Angeles Basin, coastal regions from Topanga Canyon in the north to perhaps as far south as Aliso Creek, and the islands of San Clemente, San Nicholas, and Santa Catalina (Bean and Smith 1978:538–540). Recent studies suggest the population may ha ve numbered as many as 10,000 individuals at their peak in the Precontact Period.

It should be noted that Gabrielino origin stories assert that the union of sky and the earth created the world and everything in it; finally producing Wewyoot or Weywot, the father of all people (McCawley 1996: 172).

This occurred in situ, meaning the people were always here and the Shoshonean Wedge hypothesis is, according to the Gabrielino, false.

Kroeber (1925:621) considered the Gabrielino:
. . . to have been the most advanced group south of Tehachapi, except perhaps the Chumash. They certainly were the wealthiest and most thoughtful of all the Shoshoneans of the State, and dominated these civilizations wherever contacts occurred.

3.2.3 History
In California, the historic era is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish or Mission Period (1769 to 1821), the Mexican or Rancho Period (1821 to 1848), and the American Period (1848 to present). The Spanish Period (1769 -1821) is represented by exploration of the region; establishment of the San Diego Presidio and missions at San Gabriel and San Luis Rey; and the introduction of livestock, agricultural goods, and European architecture and construction techniques. Early exploration of the Riversid e County area began in 1772 when Lieutenant Pedro Fages (then Military Governor of San Diego) crossed through the San Jacinto Valley. Permanent settlement began about the turn of the century through the issuance of land

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 15 Setting
grants and grazing permits, and Spanish influence continued to some extent after 1821 due to the continued implementation of the mission system.

The Mexican Period (1821 -1848) began with Mexican independence from Spain and continued until the end of the Mexican -American War. The Secularization Act resulted in the transfer, through land grants (called ranchos) of large mission tracts to politically prominent individuals. Sixteen ranchos were granted in Riverside County, the first to Juan Bandini in 1838. The Project is located in what was the Rancho La Laguna, also known as Laguna Grande and La Laguna de Temecula. It was confirmed in 1844 in an official land grant to Julian Manriquez by the Mexican governor of California. The rancho consisted of three leagues that included the lakebed and the shoreline (Hampson 1991). At that time, cattle ranching was a more substantial business than agricultural acti vities, and trade in hides and tallow increased during the early portion of this period. Until the Gold Rush of 1849, livestock and horticulture dominated California's economy.

The American Period (1848-present) began with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, and in 1850, California was accepted into the Union of the United States primarily due to the population increase created by the Gold Rush of 1849. The cattle industry reached its greatest prosperity during the first years of the American Period. Mexican Period land grants had created large pastoral estates in California, and demand for beef during the Gold Rush led to a cattle boom that lasted from 1849 –1855. However, beginning about 1855, the demand for beef began to decline due to imports of sheep from New Mexico and cattle from the Mississippi and Missouri Valleys. When the beef market collapsed, many California ranchers lost their ranchos through foreclosure. A series of disastrous floods in 1861–1862, followed by two years of extreme drought, which continued to some extent until 1876, altered ranching forever in the southern California area.

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY
This history of the City is adapted from the Cultural land Tribal Cultural Resources section of the City of Moreno Valley General Plan EIR.

The Moreno Valley area began to develop in the late 1880s with the establishment of the Alessandro and Moreno settlements. The community of Moreno was built around the intersection of Redlands Boulevard and Alessandro Boulevard and named in honor of Frank Brown (Moreno in Spanish), a civil engineer, who had visions of a successful agricultural community like he had established in Redlands to the north of the Valley (Redlands Daily Facts 2008). The community of Alessandro was located within the limits of present- day March Air Reserve Base (MARB). In 1893 Brown formed the Bear Valley Land and Water Company and built a dam at Bear Valley in the Sa n Bernardino Mountains to provide water to the communities of Redlands at first and ultimately the communities of Moreno and Alessandro. The increased demands for water from Bear Valley resulted in litigation with the City of Redlands which claimed priority rights. In 1891, the Perris & Alessandro Irrigation District was formed by order of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to solve the litigation between Redlands and the Moreno Valley region over water use from the Bear Valley Dam. Redlands won the litigation in 1899. The majority of the Valley was abandoned that year after the loss of water rights and due to a drought.

The Alessandro Aviation Field was established in 1918 and then renamed to March Field. March Field closed in 1922 after World War I (WWI), and re-opened in 1927 as a flight training school (military museum 2021).

The name was changed March Air Force Base i n 1948 (military museum 2020). The unincorporated community of Sunnymead was established in 1922 and was followed by the unincorporated community of Edgemont in 1940. The development of March Air Force Base post-WWII aided in the continued growth of Edgemont and Sunnymead. The Eastern Municipal Water District began to supply water to the Valley in

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 16 Setting
1954. The dam at Lake Perris was completed in 1970. In 1984, the communities of Edgemont, Sunnymead, and Moreno came together to form the city of Moreno Valley and the first general plan was adopted in 1986 to guide future growth and development.

TO WN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
November 2024 17 Methods

4.0 METHOD S

4.1 Cultural Re sources Records Search
A literature review of documents on file at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside was completed by EIC staff on August 19, 2021 (Attachment A). The review consisted of an examination of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Sunnymead , CA 7.5 -minute quadrangles to evaluate the Project area for any cultural resources sites recorded or cultural resources studies conducted on the parcel and within a one-half mile radius. The EIC is the designated branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and houses records concerning archaeological and historic resources in Riverside, Inyo, and Mono Counties. The records search provided data on known archaeological and built environment resources as well as p revious studies within one- half mile of the Project area . Data sources consulted at the EIC included archaeological records, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (DOE), historic maps, and the Historic Property Data File (HPDF) maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The HPDF contains listings for the CRHR and/or NRHP, California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI).

4.2 Paleontological Resources Records Search
A paleontological resources literature review was completed by Darla Radford, Collections Manager at the Western Science Center (WSC) in Hemet, California on July 7, 2021 (Attachment B). The review provided information on geological formations, paleontological localities, the Project’s potential to adversely affect fossil resources, and mitigation recommendations.

4.3 Historic Aerial Review
An examination wa s m ade b y Patrick M axon o f t he historic a erial p hotographs a t HistoricAerials.com (NETRONLINE n.d.) on December 13, 2021.

4.4 Native American Scoping
Tribal consultation under Assembly Bill (AB) 52 an
d Senate Bill (SB) 18 will be initiated and conducted by the City of Moreno Valley with interested Tribes.

4.5 Field Survey
An archaeological survey of the Project area, utilizing transects spaced 10-15 meters apart, was conducted by VCS Archaeologist Patrick Maxon, RPA on June 29, 2021. The entire Project area was examined for the presence of cultural resources.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 18 Results

5.0 RESULTS

5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search

5.1.1 Studies
The EIC search resulted in a finding that 18 cultural resources studies have been completed within one-half mile of the Project area (Attachment A). One of these studies (RI-02171) includes at least a portion of the Project area. Native American tribes may have additional historical resource information.

Table 1 briefly describes the known cultural resources within one-half mile of the Project area.

Table 1
Cultural Resources Studies Within the Project Site
Site Number Recorder (Year) Comments
RI-02171 McCarthy/1987 Moreno Valley Inventory; 680 acres; 65 resources

5.1.2 Resources
EIC information notes that 14 cultural resources have been recorded within a one -half mile radius of the Project area (Attachment A). One of these resources (P-33-007277) is recorded within the Project site and eight prehistoric milling slicks are recorded within one -half mile. Table 2 identifies the cultural resources within one-half mile of the Project area.

Table 2
Cultural Resources within One-Half Mile of the Project Site Site Number (P-33-) Recorded (Year) Description
003088 Drover (1986) Bedrock Milling Feature
003089 Drover (1986) Bedrock Milling Feature
003133 McCarthy (1986) Bedrock Milling Feature
003134 McCarthy (1986) Bedrock Milling Feature
003135 McCarthy (1986) Bedrock Milling Feature
003223 Pinto (1987) Bedrock Milling Feature
003224 Pinto (1987) Bedrock Milling Feature
003235 Pinto (1987) Bedrock Milling Feature
003248 Swope (1987) Well/Cistern
003249 Swope (1987) Well/Cistern
007277* Warner (1983) Mellor House
007281 Warner (1983) Dr. Atwood’s office and home
011215 Warner (1983) Orchard 11215
015027 Goodwin (2004) Water conveyance system
* On the current Project site.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 19 Results
P-33-007277: The Mellor House is recorded at 26960 Alessandro Boulevard, in the extreme southeast corner of the Project site. It was built by the Mellor family around 1915, and was a good example of rural architecture in the Sunnymead area, but it has since been removed. It was a vernacular wood frame house, rectangular in plan view, with wood shingle siding. Tall, shade pepper trees associated with the house remain on the Project site in the southeast corner near the intersection of Alessandro Boulevard and Nason Street.

Molly Earp, Cultural Planning Specialist, Pechanga Cultural Resources Department provided additional information regarding cultural resources within one mile of the Project area (Earp 2022). This list includes 13 prehistoric and 3 historic-era resources:

Table 3
Additional Cultural Resources within One-Mile of the Project Site Site Number Recorded (Year) Description
CA-RIV-3341 Prior et al. (1987) Prehistoric: 3 slicks
CA-RIV-3159 Prior et al. (1987) Prehistoric: 3 slicks
CA-RIV-857 Prior et al. (1987) Prehistoric: 5 slicks
CA-RIV-3342 Neiditch (1987) Prehistoric: slick
CA-RIV-3233 Pinto (1987) Prehistoric: slick
CA-RIV-3234 Pinto (1987) Prehistoric: slick
CA-RIV-3067 Drover & Smith (1990) Prehistoric: basin metate 33-15030/CA-RIV-7994 Brunzell (2004) Historic: Concrete check dam CA-RIV-3959 Drover & Smith (1990) Prehistoric: 2 slicks, 1 basin metate CA-RIV- 3960 Drover & Smith (1990) Prehistoric: Slick
33-015020/CA-RIV-7984 Fulton & Lawson (2004) Prehistoric: 3 slicks 33-015024/CA-RIV-7988 Brunzell & Goodwin (2005) Historic: Trash Scatter 33-3966/CA-RIV-3966 Fulton & Lawson (2004) Prehistoric: 3 slicks 33-15029/CA-RIV-7993 Brunzell (2005) Historic: earthen reservoir 33-015021/CA-RIV-7985 Fulton & Lawson (2004) Prehistoric: Slick 33-015032/CA-RIV-7996
(Previously CA-RIV-3961 and CA-RIV-3964)
Fulton & Lawson (2004) Prehistoric: 2 Slicks and igneous rock flake

5.2 Paleontological Resources Records Search
The Western Science Center (WSC) in Hemet completed a Paleontological Records search on July 7, 2021 (Attachment B) that determined no paleontological resource localities are recorded on the Project Site; however, three fossil localities have been found wi thin two miles of the Project area in the same sedimentary deposits. According to WSC, the western portion of the Project site is mapped as young alluvial fan deposits (Qyf) dating from the late Pleistocene to Holocene; the eastern portion consists of very old alluvial fan deposits (Qvoa) dating from the early Pleistocene.

The Aldi Distribution Center Project is in similarly mapped young alluvial sediments, and produced fossil specimen identified as giant ground sloth (Megalonyx jeffersoni), ancient horse (Equus sp.), and lameline camelid (Hemiauchenia sp.). The presence of Pleistocene megafauna within young alluvial sediments indicates that these mapped deposits may be

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 20 Results
on the older side of the estimated age range and further supports the assessment that the project area is paleontologically sensitive (Radford 2021).

According to Radford (2021), excavations for the Town Center at Moreno Valley Project have the potential to impact paleontologically sensitive sediments and any fossils recovered from this Project would likely be scientifically significant. The WSC therefore recommends that a paleontological resource mitigation plan be developed to monitor, salvage, and curate any fossils recovered during monitoring.

5.3 Historic Aerial Review
An examination of historic aerial photographs and topo maps (NETRONLINE n.d.) revealed that the majority of the Project site has not been developed. One structure (The Mellor House) was present in the southeast corner of the site before 1954, the earliest available map. A large mound of fill sediment/soil was placed in this location after 19 85 and before 1997. It extends some 900 feet to the north along Nason Street. It appears that the Mellor House was removed prior to the placement of the fill. Pepper trees related to the house location remain onsite but are not considered a significant resource because the house with which these non-native trees are associated has been removed and the integrity of the resource destroyed.

5.4 Native American Scoping
On June 22, 2021, VCS contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search and to obtain a local tribal contacts list. The NAHC responded on July 15, 2021. The results of the SLF Search were negative (Attachment C). The NAHC advises that notification letters to tribes should include the results of a records search, pedestrian survey, and SLF search. Ethnographic and geotechnical studies should also be provided. The City of Moreno Valley will conduct this outreach.

The following is the general list provided by the NAHC for tribes that have traditional lands or cultural places in the Project area and may have knowledge of cultural resources on or near the Project area. No informal outreach to tribes was undertaken:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director • Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians. Amanda Vance, Chairperson • Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Doug Welmas, Chairperson • Cahuilla Band of Indians. Daniel Salgado, Chairperson • Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians. Ralph Goff, Chairperson • Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians. Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson • Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians, Robert Pinto, Chairperson • La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians. Gwendolyn Parada, Chairperson • La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians. Javaughn Miller, Tribal Administrator • Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeño Indians. Shane Chapparosa, Chairperson • Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation. Angela Elliott Santos, Chairperson • Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians. Michael Linton, Chairperson • Morongo Band of Mission Indians. Robert Martin, Chairperson

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 21 Results
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians. Ann Brierty, THPO
• Pala Band of Mission Indians. Shasta Gaughen, THPO
• Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. Mark Macarro, Chairperson • Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation. Jill McCormick, SHPO • Ramona Band of Cahuilla. Joseph Hamilton, Chairperson • Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians. Cheryl Madrigal, THPO • Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians. Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson • San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. Jessica Mauck, Director of Cultural Resources • Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians. Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair • Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson • Torrez-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians. Thomas Tortez, Chairperson

5.5 Field Survey
On June 29, 2021, Patrick Maxon, VCS Director of Cultural Services completed a pedestrian survey of the Project area. The site was recently partially disked, leaving approximately one -half of it covered in dried grasses in a checkerboard-grid pattern. Starting in the southeast corner of the site, nearest Nason Street and Alessandro Boulevard, the disked parts of the site were surveyed utilizing north/south transects spaced approximately 20 meters apart. The structure (Mellor House) seen in the historical aerial photographs is no longer present on site. The Project site has been subjected to various episodes of dumping (furniture, appliances, and other trash), especially in the southeast corner of the site. A light scatter of trash is present along the margins of the site, especially along the south and east borders. No other cultural resources were observed.

Southern End; View to North

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 22 Results

Fill Soils Mound, Southeast Corner; View to Northeast

NE Corner; View to South

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 23 Management Considerations

6.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form, which includes, for Section V. Cultural Resources, questions relating to cultural resources, including the historic built environment, historic and prehistoric archaeology, and human remains , and a paleontological question included in Section VII, Geology and Soils.

Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines Section VII, Geology and Soils , includes an additional question related to the presence or absence of fossil resources. Accordingly, a project may result in a significant environmental impact if:
• The Project would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines Section XVII , Tribal Cultural Resources , includes additional questions related to the presence or absence of Tribal Cultural Resources within the Project area. They are as follows:
• Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 24 Findings and Recommendations

7.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
An examination of historic aerial photographs (NETRONLINE n.d.) revealed that the majority of the Project site has not been developed. One structure (The Mellor House) was present in the southeast corner of the site before 19 54, the earliest available aerial photograph. A large mound of sediment was placed in this location after 1985 and before 1997. It extends some 900 feet to the north along Nason Street. It appears that the Mellor House was removed prior to the placement of the fill. It is therefore not a historical resource and not adversely affected by the proposed project. The non-native trees that were associated with the house are not considered significant because the house has been removed and the integrity of the resource destroyed.

Eight prehistoric milling slicks are recorded within one -half mile of the Project area , attesting to the prehistoric presence of indigenous populations in the vicinity. An additional 13 prehistoric resources were identified within one mile of the Project area by Pechanga (Earp 2022).

The entire Project area is covered by paleontologically sensitive fluvial fan deposits dating from the early Pleistocene to Holocene.

Implementation of the proposed Project and off-site improvements would not adversely affect any existing known cultural resources. However, because the area is known to contain resources and it is paleontologically sensitive, archaeological and paleontological monitoring is recommended during ground disturbing activities.

7.1 Mitigation Measures

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 25 Findings and Recommendations
protocols that apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate protocols. All new construction personnel that will conduct earthwork or grading ac tivities that begin work on the Project following the initial Training must take the Cultural Sensitivity Training prior to beginning work and the Project archaeologist and Consulting Tribe(s) shall make themselves available to provide the training on an as-needed basis; c. The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s) and Project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subje ct to a cultural resources evaluation.

CR-2: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall secure an agreement with the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians regarding monitoring during ground- disturbing activities.

The Developer is also required to provide a minimum of 30 days advance notice to the tribe of all mass grading and trenching activities. The Native American Tribal Representative shall have the authority to temporarily halt and redirect earth moving activities in the affected area in the event that suspected archaeologica l resources are unearthed. If the Native American Tribal Representative suspect that an archaeological resource may have been unearthed, the Project Archaeologist or the Tribal Representative shall immediately redirect grading operations in a 100-foot radi us around the find to allow identification and evaluation of the suspected resource. In consultation with the Native American Tribal Representative, the Project Archaeologist shall evaluate the suspected resource and make a determination of significance pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 26 Findings and Recommendations
construction supervisor is obligated to halt work in a 100 -foot radius around the find and call the Project Archaeologist and the Tribal Representative to the site to assess the significance of the find.”
CR-5: If potential historic or cultural resources are uncovered during excavation or construction activities at the project site, work in the affected area must cease immediately and a qualified person meeting the Secretary of the Interior's standards (36 CFR 61), Tribal Representatives, and all site monitors per the Mitigation Measures, shall be consulted by the City to evaluate the find, and as appropriate recommend alternative measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate negative effects on the historic, or prehistoric resource. Determinations and recommendations by the consultant shall be immediately submitted to the Planning Division for consideration, and implemented as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director and any and all Consulting Nati ve American Tribes as defined in CR -1 before any further work commences in the affected area.

PR-2: The Project Paleontologist shall prepare a final paleontological resource s monitoring and mitigation report of findings and significance , including lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and graphics to accurately record their original location(s). All recovered fossils will be offered for curation in perpetuity to the Western Science Center in Hemet, the principal fossil repository in Riverside County. A letter documenting receipt and acceptance of all fossil collections by the receiving institution must be included in the final report. The report, when submitted to (and accepted by) the City of Moreno Valley, shall signify satisfactory completion of the project program to mitigate impacts to any nonrenewable paleontological resources.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 27 Findings and Recommendations
origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours. The NAHC shall identify the MLD with whom consultation shall occur to determine the treatment and disposition of the remains.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 28 Certification

8.0 CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached figures 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.

DATE: November 2024 SIGNED:

_________________________________
Patrick Maxon., RPA
Director, Cultural Resources

~t«--:rk'cJ-

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 29 References

9.0 REFERENCES
Bean, Lowell J.
1978 Cahuilla. In: Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, California, R. F. Heizer (editor), pp. 575-587. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.

Bean, Lowell J. and Katherine S. Saubel
1972 Temalpakh (from the Earth): Cahuilla Indian Knowledge and Usage of Plants. Malki Museum Press, Banning.

Bean, Lowell J. and Florence C. Shipek
1978 Luiseño. In: Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California R. F. Heizer (editor), pp. 550-563. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.

Byrd, B. and M. Raab
2007 Prehistory if the Southern Bight: Models for a New Millennium. In California Prehistory:

Colonization, Culture, and Complexity (pp. 215 –227). Terry Jones and Kathryn Klar, Editors.

Altamira Press, a Division of Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Chartkoff, J. L. and K. K. Chartkoff
1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Davis, E.L., C.W. Brott, and D.L. Weide
1969 The Western Lithic Co-Tradition. San Diego Museum Papers Vol. 6, San Diego Museum of Man, San Diego.

Erlandson, J. and R. Colton
1991 An Archaeological Context for Early Holocene Studies on the California Coast. In Hunter- Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California , edited by J.M. Erlandson and R.H. Colton, pp. 1-10. Cotson Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Hampson, Paul R.
1991 Cultural Resources Survey and Test Excavation, Lake Elsinore, California . Greenwood and Associates. Report on file. Eastern Information Center, Riverside, CA.

Jones, T. and K. Klar
2007 California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity . T. Jones and K. Klar (editors), Altamira Press.

Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Dover Publications Inc., New York.

Lovin, June
1963 A Summary Description of Luiseño Material Culture. In Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1962-1963, pp. 81-130. University of California, Los Angeles.

Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Inc. Orlando, Florida.

TOWN CENTER AT MORENO VALLEY PROJECT
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

November 2024 30 References
Moreno Valley, City of
2021 City of Moreno Valley General Plan 2040 Final Program Environmental Impact Report.

NETRONLINE
n.d. Historic Aerials: http://www.historicaerials.com/

Office of Historic Preservation
1990 Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format .

Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento, California.

Raab, L. and T. Jones
2004 The Future of California Prehistory. In Prehistoric California: Archaeology and the Myth of Paradise, edited by L.M. Raab and T.L. Jones, pp. 204 -211. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Radford, Darla
2021 Results of Paleontological record search for the Moreno Valley Town Center Project, in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County.

Strong, William Duncan
1929 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 26(1): 1-358.

Wallace, William J.
1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology II.

Weeks, K. and Grimmer, A.
1995 The Secretary of The Interior ’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties: With Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings . U.S.

Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, Heritage Preservation Services (Washington, D.C.).

ATTACHMENT A

CONFIDENTIAL

CULTURAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH (EIC)
NOT F

OR PUBLIC REVIEW

ATTACHMENT B

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH (WSC)

2345 Searl Parkway ♦ Hemet, CA 92543 ♦ phone 951.791.0033 ♦ fax 951.791.0032 ♦ WesternScienceCenter.org

VCS Environmental July 7, 2021
Pat Maxon
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

Dear Mr. Maxon,

This letter presents the results of a record search conducted for the Moreno Valley Town Center Project in Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California. The project site is located south of Cottonwood Avenue, north of Alessandro Boulevard, west of Nason Street, and east of Morrison Street in Section 9 of Township 3 South and Range 3 West on the Sunnymead, CA USGS 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle.

The geologic units underlying the project area are mapped entirely as alluvial fan deposits dating from the early Pleistocene to Holocene (Morton & Matti, 2001). Pleistocene alluvial units are considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. The Western Science Center does not have localities within the project area or a one mile radius, but does have three localities less than two miles away associated with the Aldi Distribution Center Project. The Aldi Distribution Center Project is in similarly mapped young alluvial sediments, and produced fossil specimen identified as giant ground sloth (Megalonyx jeffersoni), ancient horse (Equus sp.), and lameline camelid (Hemiauchenia sp.). The presence of Pleistocene megafauna within young alluvial sediments indicates that these mapped deposits may be on the older side of the estimated age range and further supports the assessment that the project area is paleontologically sensitive.

Any fossils recovered from the Moreno Valley Town Center Project area would be scientifically significant. Excavation activity associated with development of the area has the potential to impact the paleontologically sensitive Pleistocene units and it is the recommendation of the Western Science Center that a paleontological resource mitigation plan be put in place to monitor, salvage, and curate any recovered fossils associated with the current study area.

If you have any questions, or would like further information, please feel free to contact me at [email protected]

Sincerely,

Darla Radford
Collections Manager
~ WESTERN SCIENCE CENTER
Moreno Valley Town Center Project
----7
I

ATTACHMENT C

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION (NAHC)

Local Government Tribal Consultation List Request
Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100
West Sacramento , CA 95691
916-373-3710
916-373-5471 - Fax
nahc@nahc .ca.gov
Type of List Requested
II' CEQA Tribal Consultation List (AB 52) - Per Public Resources Code§ 21080.3.1, subs. (b), (d), (e) am/ 21080.3.2 D General Plan (SB 18) - Per Govem111e11t Code§ 65352.3.

Local Action Type:

General Plan General Plan Element General Plan Amendment _ Specific Plan _ Specific Plan Amendment _ Pre-planning Outreach Activity Required Information
Project Title: JV& , f l/fl v~ll(y & vv-n UA 1-~,-
Local Government/Lead Agency: C , '/.._I J' /t( ~r-t'ri t? ~/kv I I
Contact Person: ---.1--+---(Y---+--{;---IF6=+~- {:--+-_-t3~tf:',..........A.....,._cro~/a_ 5 _l ___ -r--.}-.Cc.=---,-fJ"+-t9¥'-' ...... _, _
Street Address: _____ f'/ _ _ .....,. "----1- -"'C/'--1 __ ..,__---4 ----'--\ "" ___ 4--_ ,..:......,.....,=-- .....:lv_ ~-~---- '
City: {P j
------- ----------,,"1;---'---,~ ----b,W---~ ~----'t1'c;,<--- Phone: _______ -+,'? ___ f/,,___, __ _ Fax: ----------------- Email: -------------------
Specific Area Subject to Proposed Action
County, Rl v( Y'>;Je CUy/Commun;1y, &,<,1t> ~lky
Project Description: 7) / V ,e / &f (h l/1- .{ 11f I).. t p, /h /Y)~ re 1 ~ ( It/ p/l ft/1,ftr -
\/ v -t c1 : (~·5tvl~e ;1tvt5-f-:,J,~,,_,_
Additional Request
IS' Sacred Lands File Search - Required Information:

USGS Quadrangle Name(s): __ ~-=---_v_ //-'--/J---'-----,'ff---'-y'VJ_ ~=-----..;"'l..e___j ____________ _ Township:_~_ '3_ (}_<1_ -ft, _ _ Range:~"3_ /11/_ / _~_j __ Section(s): _ ___,1------

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 2 ends

July 15, 2021

Patrick Maxon
VCS Environmental

Via Email to: [email protected]

Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, Moreno Valley Town Center Project, Riverside County

Dear Mr. Maxon:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) (“Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.”)

Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides:

Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section.

The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for notification of projects in the tribe’s areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources.

The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as:

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Julie Tumamait-
Stenslie
Chumash

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov

Page 2 of 2 ends

• A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites;
• Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; • Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and
• If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:

• Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code section 6254.10.

3. The result of any Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was negative.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE.

Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current.

If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].

Sincerely,

Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst

Attachment

r
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Patricia Garcia-Plotkin, Director
5401
Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA,
92264
Phone: (
760
)
699
-
6907
Fax: (
760
)
699-6924
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson
5401
Dinah Shore Drive
Palm Springs, CA,
92264
Phone: (
760
)
699
-
6800
Fax: (
760
)
699-6919
Cahuilla
Augustine Band of Cahuilla
Mission Indians
Amanda Vance, Chairperson
P.O. Box
846

Coachella, CA,
92236
Phone: (
760
)
398
-
4722
Fax: (
760
)
369-7161
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Cabazon Band of Mission
Indians
Doug Welmas, Chairperson
84-245
Indio Springs Parkway
Indio, CA,
92203
Phone: (
760
)
342
-
2593
Fax: (
760
)
347-7880
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Cahuilla Band of Indians
Daniel Salgado, Chairperson
52701
U.S. Highway
371

Anza, CA,
92539
Phone: (
951
)
763
-
5549
Fax: (
951
)
763-2808
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Campo Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
Ralph Goff, Chairperson
36190
Church Road, Suite
1 Campo, CA,
91906
Phone: (
619
)
478
-
9046
Fax: (
619
)
478-5818
[email protected]
Diegueno
Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay
Indians
Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson
4054
Willows Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
445
-
6315
Fax: (
619
)
445-9126
[email protected]
Diegueno
Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay
Indians
Robert Pinto, Chairperson
4054
Willows Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
445
-
6315
Fax: (
619
)
445-9126
[email protected]
Diegueno
La Posta Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
Gwendolyn Parada, Chairperson
8 Crestwood Road
Boulevard, CA,
91905
Phone: (
619
)
478
-
2113
Fax: (
619
)
478-2125
LP
13 [email protected]
Diegueno
La Posta Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
Javaughn Miller, Tribal
Administrator
8 Crestwood Road
Boulevard, CA,
91905
Phone: (
619
)
478
-
2113
Fax: (
619
)
478-2125
[email protected]
Diegueno
1 of 3
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5
of
the Health and Safety Code, Section
5097.94
of the Public Resources Code and section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1
for the proposed Moreno Valley Town
Center Project, Riverside County.

PROJ-2021-
003912
07/15/2021 04:01 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
Riverside County
7/15/2021

Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla
and Cupeño Indians
Ray Chapparosa, Chairperson
P.O. Box
189

Warner Springs, CA,
92086-0189
Phone: (
760
)
782
-
0711
Fax: (
760
)
782-0712
Cahuilla
Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay
Nation
Angela Elliott Santos, Chairperson
P.O. Box
1302

Boulevard, CA,
91905
Phone: (
619
)
766
-
4930
Fax: (
619
)
766-4957
Diegueno
Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
Michael Linton, Chairperson
P.O Box
270

Santa Ysabel, CA,
92070
Phone: (
760
)
782
-
3818
Fax: (
760
)
782-9092
[email protected]
Diegueno
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson
12700
Pumarra Road
Banning, CA,
92220
Phone: (
951
)
755
-
5110
Fax: (
951
)
755-5177
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Morongo Band of Mission
Indians
Ann Brierty, THPO
12700
Pumarra Road
Banning, CA,
92220
Phone: (
951
)
755
-
5259
Fax: (
951
)
572-6004
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Serrano
Pala Band of Mission Indians
Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer
PMB
50 ,
35008
Pala Temecula
Rd.

Pala, CA,
92059
Phone: (
760
)
891
-
3515
Fax: (
760
)
742-3189
[email protected]
Cupeno
Luiseno
Pechanga Band of Luiseno
Indians
Mark Macarro, Chairperson
P.O. Box
1477

Temecula, CA,
92593
Phone: (
951
)
770
-
6000
Fax: (
951
)
695-1778
[email protected]
Luiseno
Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation
Jill McCormick, Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box
1899

Yuma, AZ,
85366
Phone: (
760
)
572
-
2423
historicpreservation@quechantrib
e.com
Quechan
Ramona Band of Cahuilla
Joseph Hamilton, Chairperson
P.O. Box
391670

Anza, CA,
92539
Phone: (
951
)
763
-
4105
Fax: (
951
)
763-4325
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA,
92082
Phone: (
760
)
297
-
2635
[email protected]
Luiseno
2 of 3
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5
of
the Health and Safety Code, Section
5097.94
of the Public Resources Code and section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1
for the proposed Moreno Valley Town
Center Project, Riverside County.

PROJ-2021-
003912
07/15/2021 04:01 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
Riverside County
7/15/2021

Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson
One Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA,
92082
Phone: (
760
)
749
-
1051
Fax: (
760
)
749-5144
[email protected]
Luiseno
San Manuel Band of Mission
Indians
Jessica Mauck, Director of
Cultural Resources
26569
Community Center Drive
Highland, CA,
92346
Phone: (
909
)
864
-
8933
[email protected]
Serrano
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box
391820

Anza, CA,
92539
Phone: (
951
)
659
-
2700
Fax: (
951
)
659-2228
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Soboba Band of Luiseno
Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box
487

San Jacinto, CA,
92581
Phone: (
951
)
654
-
5544
Fax: (
951
)
654-4198
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Luiseno
Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla
Indians
Thomas Tortez, Chairperson
P.O. Box
1160

Thermal, CA,
92274
Phone: (
760
)
397
-
0300
Fax: (
760
)
397-8146
[email protected]
Cahuilla
3 of 3
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5
of
the Health and Safety Code, Section
5097.94
of the Public Resources Code and section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1
for the proposed Moreno Valley Town
Center Project, Riverside County.

PROJ-2021-
003912
07/15/2021 04:01 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
Riverside County
7/15/2021

ATTACHMENT D

PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

PATRICK MAXON, M.A., RPA
Director | Cultural Services
A certified DBE, SBE & WBE firm 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
949.489.2700 | vcsenvironmental.com

EDUCATION
1994/MA/Anthropology/
California State University,
Fullerton
1987/BA/Psychology/Sociology
Towson State University,
Towson, MD
VCS
TEAM MEMBER SINCE 2017

CERTIFICATIONS/TRAINING
Riverside County
Transportation and Land
Management Agency Certified
Archaeologist (No. 226)
California Energy Commission
Cultural Resources Specialist
(2001)
Registered Professional
Archaeologist (National)/No.
11468/Register of Professional
Archaeologists
Orange County Certified
Archaeologist (1999)
National Historic Preservation
Act Section 106 Compliance
Advanced Certification, 2002
Principal Investigator, Southern
California/Bureau of Land
Management

ABOUT
Patri
ck Maxon M.A., RPA is a Registered Professional Archaeologi st with 30 years of experience in all aspects of cultural resources management, including prehistoric and historic archaeology, paleontology, ethnography, and tribal consultation. He has expertise in compliance with NEPA, CEQA, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, and the Clean Water Act, among others.

P
atrick has completed hundreds of cultural resources projects throughout Southern California and in Arizona and Nevada that have involved (1) agency, client, Nativ e American, and subcontractor coordination and consultation ; (2) treatment plans and research design development; (3) archival research; (4) field reconnaissance; (5) site testing; (6) data recovery excavation; (7) construction monitoring; (8) site recordation; (9) site protection/preservation; (10) mapping/cartography; (11) laboratory analysis; and (12) report production. He has managed projects within the jurisdiction of the USACE, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal agencies that
require compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. He has also completed projects throughout Southern California under CEQA for State and local governments and municipalities, including Caltrans, the Department of General Services (DGS), the California Energy Commission, the California Department of Water Resources, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), the Los Angeles Department of W
ater and Power, the Los Angeles Unified School District, and others. Patrick meets the Secretary of Interior's standards for historic preservation programs for archaeology and i
s a Certified Archaeologist in Orange County and for the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency.

SELECT EXPERIENCE/PROJECTS
Diamond Sports Complex, Lake Elsinore, CA: VCS is undertaking a cultural resources investigation that was initiated by developing a cultural resources monitoring plan with the Pechanga and Soboba Tribes. We subsequently commenced the controlled grading of site CA-RIV-4042 as required in the project mit igation measures. T he project was suspended after the discovery of human remains. The City and tribes are consulting on the disposition of the burial.

Mission Trail Development, Lake Elsinore, CA: VCS completed cultural and paleontological resources monitoring, guided by a Cultural Resources Monitoring Plan that we developed, of grading for a housing dev elopment. C ultural resources recovered from the site were subsequently reburied on site by the Tribal monitors from the Pechanga and Soboba tribes. Two paleontological specimens: a pair of Mammoth ribs and a horse vertebra, were recovered and analyzed. As they were not museum quality specimens, they were made into a display by the project Applicant.

Home Sweet Home Development, Lakeland Village, CA: Project Manager for a Phase I cultural resources survey. The study consisted of (1) archaeological and paleontological records searches, (2) Native American consultation with the NAHC and subsequent communication with several tribes that wished to consult; (3) pedestrian survey of the project site; and (4) a technical report describing the results of the study and recommended mitigation measure for any potential impacts to resources. No resources were discovered.

PATRICK MAXON, M.A., RPA
(■i VCS Environmental
.... EXPERTS IN STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS
PATRICK MAXON, M.A., RPA
Director| Cultural Resources VCS Environmental

A certified DBE, SBE & WBE firm 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
949.489.2700 | vcsenvironmental.com
Qualified Archaeologist-
Secretary of Interior Standards
and Guidelines of Professional
Qualification & Standards for
Archeology, as per Title 36,
Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 61/

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Pacific Coast Archaeological
Society
Society for California
Archaeology
Society for American
Archaeology
Association of Environmental
Professionals (OCAEP Board
member since 2005)
Summerly Development Project Cultural Resources Monitoring, Lake Elsinore, CA:

Project Manager for this project, which included grading for a drainage channel, a large sewer line, the subsequent residential development, and a 71-1cre detention basin.

Patrick managed the placement and work of VCS monitors on the project and ensured that any discovery of cultural or paleontological resources was handled appropriately.

Daily field notes describing the activities performed each day were maintained by monitors and were included in the final report. No cultural resources were observed or collected during monitoring activities; however, a large, important assemblage of Pleistocene fossils (bison, camel, mammoth, et al.) was recovered from the lake sediments and recently curated at the We4stern Science Center in Hemet Godinho Dairy Project Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, Eastvale, California. Mr.

Maxon was the Cultural Resources Project Manager for the Godhino Dairy Project located in the City of Eastvale. He conducted a Phase I cultural resources study for the project, which included cultural and paleontological resources literature reviews, Native American scoping, and a pedestrian field survey of the project site. The site contains the extant remains of the Godinho Dairy which dates to at least the early 1960s. Three prehistoric archaeological sites are recorded within one mile of the project site; one (CA- RIV-2801) was recorded just a few hundred feet to the southeast. The Santa Ana River was used extensively by prehistoric populations of the area. Paleontologically sensitive Older Quaternary Alluvium likely lies at depth on the project site. No significant archeological resources were discovered on the project site during the survey. The extant Godinho Dairy complex appears to exceed 50 years of age and its recordation and evaluation as a historic resource was recommended. The proposed project would allow for development of the dairy property into a residential neighborhood.

La Rivera Drainage Project Cultural Resources Services, Riverside, California. Mr.

Maxon served as the Cultural Resources Project Manager for the La Rivera Drainage Project located in the City of Riverside. The Phase I cultural resources study included (1) a cultural resources literature review of the project site at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at the University of California, Riverside; (2) contact with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a review of its Sacred Lands File and to obtain a list of Native American contacts for the project area; (3) preparation of informational letters to all the NAHC-listed contacts in order to ensure a good-faith effort of participation and (4) conducted a paleontological resources literature review for the project at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA). No cultural resources were discovered and no impacts are anticipated. The project proposed to improve existing drainage conditions within the La Rivera residential development and BonTerra Consulting prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for its implementation.

Riverside Energy Resource Center Archaeological and Paleontological, and B iological Services, Riverside County. Mr. Maxon served as the Program Director for the archaeological, paleontological, and biological services at the Riverside Energy Resource Center in Riverside County. He managed all aspects of the archaeological, paleontological, historic, and biological surveys of the power plant site and its associated transmission lines and pipelines; he also coordinated monitoring the power plant site and its associated facilities. Mr. Maxon maintained client contacts, coordinated with the California Energy Commission, and communicated with the Riverside public utilities. In addition, he conducted cultural resources surveys and monitoring, completed the cultural resources survey report, and wrote monthly cultural resources monitoring reports and a final project report.

PATRIICK MAXON, M.A., IRPA
PATRICK MAXON, M.A., RPA
Director| Cultural Resources VCS Environmental

A certified DBE, SBE & WBE firm 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
949.489.2700 | vcsenvironmental.com
Biological and Cultural Resources Surveys, Jurisdictional Delineations, Track Upgrade from Thermal to Araz. Mr. Maxon was the Cultural Resources Project Manager for the Biological and Cultural Resources Surveys, Jurisdictional Delineations, and Track Upgrade from Thermal to Araz. The project began by consulting and coordinating with local, State, and/or federal agencies (as appropriate); the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO); the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR); and other relevant agencies to develop a Programmatic Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to consider the cultural resources associated with the project. Mr. Maxon and his crew conducted an intensive 100 percent pedestrian cultural resources survey of the area o f potential effect (APE) in
transects. Initial Native American consultation and bridge and culvert recordation were provided. There are approximately 609 structures (bridges and culverts) in the project area, of which 512 were built between 1903 and 1960 and are considered historic. An Architectural Historian visited each structure and produced a Primary Record (DPR 523A) and a Location Map (DPR523J).

Desert Ranch Project Cultural Survey, Riverside County. Mr. Maxon served as the Project Manager for the Desert Ranch Project, which consists of approximately seven square miles of desert overlooking the Salton Sea. He helped to provide a Phase I Cultural Resource Inventory for the Client, which entailed a walk of the entire property to survey for archaeological sites. Over 40 sites were recorded and excavation of several is anticipated. In addition to conducting surveys, Mr. Maxon met with the local Indian tribe, the Torres-Martinez Band of Cahuilla Indians, regarding this project.

Lake Elsinore East Lake Specific Plan Amendment Area Cultural Resources Services, City of Lake Elsinore. Mr. Maxon was the Project Manager of the Lake Elsinore East Lake Specific Plan Amendment Area. He was responsible for the assessment of known cultural resources and preparation of final report.

Encino Water Quality Improvement Program Archaeological Monitoring, Encino. As the Project Manager for the Encino Water Quality Improvement Program, Mr. Maxon monitored excavations for pipelines.

Stone Canyon Water Quality Improvement Project Prehistoric Cultural and Biological Resources Investigation and Monitoring, City of Los Angeles. Mr. Maxon was the Project Manager for the Stone Canyon Water Quality Improvement Project in Los Angeles County and was responsible for reconnaissance and report preparation.

Salton Sea Solar Evaporation Pond Pilot Project Archaeological Survey, Imperial County. Mr. Maxon was the Project Manager of the Salton Sea Solar Evaporation Pond Pilot Project. He conducted a field reconnaissance and produced a final report.

East Branch Extension Phase II Water Pipeline Project, Mentone. Mr. Maxon was the Cultural Resources Manager for the East Branch Extension Phase II Water Pipeline Project. The project involved the preparation of all CEQA/NEPA environmental documents, the acquisition of regulatory permits, and construction monitoring. Mr.

Maxon was responsible for a full range of cultural resources services including historic, prehistoric and paleontological archival research, field surveys, evaluation of resources, and report preparation 6th Street Viaduct Project, Los Angeles. As Cultural Resources Project Manager, Mr. Maxon was responsible for coordinating with the California

Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans’s) District 7 on the previously submitted dra ft Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) and the project’s Area of Potential Effects (AEP) and completing the ASR and Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Action Plan, which included several revisions, for the proposed project. The ESA Action Plan was developed to protect an archaeological site that was recorded within the AEP. The plan entails PATRIICK MAXON, M.A., IRPA
PATRICK MAXON, M.A., RPA
Director| Cultural Resources VCS Environmental

A certified DBE, SBE & WBE firm 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
949.489.2700 | vcsenvironmental.com
surrounding the site with fencing during construction and monitoring of construction in the vicinity of the site.

Saddleback Meadows Development Archaeological Test Excavations, Orange County.

Mr. Maxon was the Program Director of archaeological test excavations for the Saddleback Meadows Development Project. He performed test excavations of ten prehistoric archaeological sites and developed a treatment plan and research design in compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA for two sites (CA-ORA-710 and CA-ORA-711).

Mr. Maxon conducted test excavations on two additional sites (CA-ORA-1435H and CA- ORA-1437), a data recovery excavation (CA-ORA-711), and laboratory and report preparation. Additionally, he developed a testing plan to evaluate two prehistoric sites (CA-ORA-713 and CA-ORA-715), managed the excavation of those sites, and maintained budgets and relations with the client (TPG Management) and the USACE.

Orange County Water District On-Call Environmental Analyses Services, Orange County, CA: Cultural Resources Manager for the On-Call Contract. Mr. Maxon has provided environmental analyses services on an as-needed basis as part of on-call contracts with the Orange County Water District since 2010. Representative cultural resources task orders completed as part of the on-call contracts, include the following:
• La Palma Recharge Basin, Anaheim, CA
• Prado Basin Mitigation Sites, Orange County, CA
• Fletcher Basin Improvement Project Cultural and Paleontological Resources Mitigation Monitoring Plan, City of Orange, CA
• Centennial Park Injection Well Project, Santa Ana, CA • EW-1 Groundwater Containment and Treatment Project, City of Fullerton, CA. • Santiago Recharge Basin Project, Orange, CA
PATRIICK MAXON, M.A., IRPA

Moreno Valley City CouncilJune 3, 2025

Moreno Valley City Council
June 3, 2025