Past Biological Survey Efforts
The Environmental Checklist in the City of Riverside Planning Commission Memorandum for P19-0380 and P19-0480 (July 25, 2019) described the previous onsite biological resources as follows:
“Original Project: Less than Significant Impact / No Impact. The Original Project site is within the boundary of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP); however, it is not within a Criteria Cell; is not classified as Public/ Quasi- Public (P/ QP) land; and it not within an identified Linkage. The Original Project site is within the MSHCP survey area for burrowing owl. As part of the 2014 Initial Study, a project-specific habitat assessment and focused burrowing owl study was prepared. The findings of these studies concluded that the Original Project was in compliance with the MSHCP and no candidate species, sensitive species, species of concern, or special status species or suitable habitat for such species were present on the Original Project site. Additionally, the Original Project site did not support riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community. For these reasons, the 2014 Initial Study concluded that implementation of the Original Project would result i n no impact with regard to candidate, sensitive or special status species; riparian habitat; the movement of native or migratory species; or conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP. The 2014 Initial Study concluded that due to the Original Project site being located within an urban built -up area and having a long history of severe site disturbance, implementation of the Original Project would not have a substantial effect on federally protected wetlands; therefore impacts would be less than significant. T he 2014 Initial Study also concluded that impacts with regard to local policies protecting trees would be less than significant because the planting and maintenance of street trees proposed as part of the Original Project will be in compliance with the City's Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual.
Revised Project: No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. As with the Original Project, the Revised Project must be consistent with and comply with the provisions of the MSHCP and the City's Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual. Gonzales Environmental Consultant, LLC, conducted a burrowing owl survey in March 20192 ( the 2019 survey) to determine if site conditions had changed since the 2014 surveys conducted for the Original Project. The results of the 2019 survey confirm the findings of the 2014 surveys; specifically, there is no suitable burrowing owl habitat; no owl burrows or burrowing owls present on the site or in adjacent areas. Additionally, there are no stock piles of material or areas that burrowing owls w ould be found. Thus, the 2019 survey concurred with the findings of the 2014 surveys. Because the 2019 survey confirmed the results of the earlier surveys and the Revised Project will comply with the MSHCP and City 's Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual, the Revised Project will result in the same impacts as the Original Project.”
Survey Methods
Prior to the field visit, the following available literature and databases were reviewed to identify sensitive habitats and special status wildlife species, specifically burrowing owls (BUOW), in the vicinity of the study area:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for special-status wildlife, sensitive plant communities and special status plants within a two-mile radius of the Project site.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Warmington Group
April 1, 2024
The Riverside Conservation Authority Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Online Mapper.
City of Riverside, California Code of Ordinances Regarding the Removal of Trees on Private Property, Chapter 13.06 Vegetation Maintenance.
The field visit was conducted on March 22, 2024, by VCS biologist Vanessa Tucker. During the survey, the biologist walked the entirety of the Project site paying special attention to those areas that could host sensitive vegetation communities or had the potential to provide suitable habitat for special status plant species. Plant species were identified using plant field and taxonomical guides, such as The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, second edition (Baldwin et al. 2012).
The vegetation communities and habitat conditions were inspected to confirm the presence and habitat quality of the vegetation found onsite. Where appropriate, descriptions of vegetation communities from the Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2008) were also utilized. Any deviations from standard vegetation classifications were made on best professional judgment when areas did not fit into a specific habitat description provided by the Manual.
During the survey, VCS paid special attention to those habitat areas that appeared to provide suitable habitat for burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia hypugaea, BUOW). The methods used to detect and identify BUOW included direct sighting of BUOW and observation of key signs such as scat, tracks, burrows, nests, and calls.
Onsite soil conditions, topography, vegetative communities, and habitat quality were documented during the field surveys. All wildlife species encountered visually or audibly during the field survey were identified and recorded in field notes. Binoculars were used to aid in the identification of observed wildlife. Photographs were taken to document existing conditions within the study area. Photo pages are attached (Appendix A).
Results
Vegetation
The Project site is surrounded by single-family residences to the north and west across Victoria Avenue and La Sierra Avenue respectively, as well as to the east and south. A majority of the site contains orange groves with remnants of a modular office, an old playground structure, and undeveloped land in the southeast corner of the site. There are several large mature trees such as citrus, avocado, sycamore, jacaranda, and pine that could support nesting birds within the Project site. The vegetation observed within the Project site include:
Citrus tree (Citrus sp.)
Avocado tree (Persea sp.)
Western Sycamore tree (Platanus racemosa)
Jacaranda tree (Jacaranda mimosifolia)
Pine tree (Pinus sp.)
Red brome grass (Bromus sp.)
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Warmington Group
April 1, 2024
Jurisdictional Waters
During the field visit, no jurisdictional waters or water features were observed within the Project site. The results of the March 2024 survey confirm that the site conditions have not changed since the 2014 and 2019 surveys. The site does not support riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community, and no candidate or sensitive species or suitable habitat for such species was present on the Project site.
Wildlife
CNDDB occurrences for coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN, Polioptila californica californica, federally threatened, MSHCP covered), occur approximately 0.6 miles south of the site (CDFW 2024). However, no suitable habitat was observed within the Project site. Therefore, no focus surveys are required. In addition, CNDDB occurrences for Stephen’s kangaroo rat (SKR, Dipodomys stephensi, MSHCP covered and federally threatened) occur approximately 0.5 miles southwest of the site (CDFW 2024). However, no suitable habitat was observed within the Project site. Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) requires a SKR mitigation fee because the Project site falls within Riverside County’s SKR Plan Fee.
During the field visit, the following birds were observed/detected:
Red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus)
House finch (Haemorhous mexicanus)
Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura)
Song sparrow (Melospiza melodia)
White-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys)
European starling (Sturnus vulgaris)
House sparrow (Passer domesticus)
Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna)
American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos)
Burrowing Owl
No BUOW or active signs thereof (whitewash, pellets, etc.) were observed within the Project site. The results of the March 2024 survey confirm the findings of the habitat assessment and focused burrowing owl study conducted in 2014 by Victor M. Horchar and the burrowing owl survey conducted in 2019 by Gonzales Environmental Consulting, LLC, which reported no suitable burrowing owl habitat or evidence thereof is present within the Project site or surrounding areas.
Conclusion
The conditions within the Project site are consistent with the 2014 and 2019 surveys. The VCS Habitat Assessment and burrowing owl survey confirms the findings of the previous habitat assessments and focused burrowing owl studies. A 30-day preconstruction survey is required pursuant to the MSHCP.
Additionally, we recommend a pre-construction nesting bird survey be conducted 3-days before the start of the Project if project clearing/grubbing and/or grading is initiated between February 15 and September 15 to avoid impacts to nesting birds, pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Warmington Group
April 1, 2024
The site does not support riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community, and no candidate or sensitive species or suitable habitat for such species was present on the Project site. The Project is in compliance with the MSHCP and the City’s Urban Forest Tree Policy Manual.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions at [email protected] or 949.234.6076.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
ONTARIO
CHINO
Cll
JURUPA
VALLEY
PROJECT
SITE
MORENO
VALLEY
2 ~-~:::-----:-~=-=-=---:-:~~~~--------'-----------------""'---"----"- .,.._ __ __. Source : County of Riverside GIS, 2019 8 0 2 4 6
,__....___.____..__....____.___,I Mi I es
P 19-0380 & P 19-0480, Exhibit 8 - Environmental Document Figure 1 - Regional Map
P19-0380 {TTM 37764)/P19-480 (VR)
A L B E R T A .
WEBB
A SS O C I A T E S
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies i
Sources: Riverside Co. GIS, 2019;
USDA NAIP, 2016.
0 250 500 750
...._ ___ ......_ ____ ..__ ___ ___. Feet
P 19-0380 & P 19-0480, Exhibit 8 - Environmental Document Figure 2 - Aerial Map
P19-0380 (TTM 37764)/P19-480 (VR)
A L B E R T A .
WEBB
A SS O C I A T E S
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Site Photographs
La Sierra and Victoria Project Biological Resources Assessment Photos taken on March 22, 2024
Appendix A
Photo 1: West-facing view of the northern portion of the survey area off Millsweet Place.
Photo 2: Southwest-facing view of the southern portion of the Project site.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Site Photographs
La Sierra and Victoria Project Biological Resources Assessment Photos taken on March 22, 2024
Appendix A
Photo 3. West-facing view of the middle portion of the Project site.
Photo 4. North-facing view of middle portion of the Project site depicting the citrus orchard in the background.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Site Photographs
La Sierra and Victoria Project Biological Resources Assessment Photos taken on March 22, 2024
Appendix A
Photo 5. North-facing view of middle portion of the Project site depicting developed land and large pine trees.
Photo 6. East-facing view of citrus trees on the southeast corner of the Project site.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Tel: 909 824 6400 Fax: 909 824 6405
April 15, 2024
Matthew Esquivel, Senior Project Manager
Warmington Residential, Southern California Division
3090 Pullman Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Re: Update to Cultural Resources Survey
Tentative Tract Map No. 37764, Assessor’s Parcel No. 136-220-016 City of Riverside, Riverside County, California
CRM TECH Contract No. 4101
Dear Mr. Esquivel:
At your request, CRM TECH has completed an update to a previously completed cultural resources survey on approximately 8.8 acres of agricultural and former agricultural land in the City of Riverside, Riverside County, California. The subject property of the study, Tentative Tract Map No. 37764, consists of what is currently Assessor’s Parcel No. 136-220-016, located on the easterly corner of La Sierra Avenue and Victoria Avenue, in a portion of the El Sobrante de San Jacinto land grant lying within T3S R6W, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian (Figs. 1, 2).
The study is part of the environmental review process for the proposed subdivision of the property for single-family residential development. The City of Riverside, as the lead agency for the project, required the study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; PRC §21000, et seq.) and the City’s Cultural Resources Ordinance (Title 20, Riverside Municipal Code). The purpose of the study is to provide the City with the necessary information and analysis to determine whether the proposed project would cause substantial adverse changes to any “historical resources,” as defined by CEQA (PRC §5020.1(j); Title 14 CCR §15064.5(a)(1)-(3)), that may exist in the project area.
Background
In 2014, McKenna et al. of Whittier, California, conducted a standard Phase I cultural resources survey for a proposed residential development project on the same parcel (McKenna 2014; see Attachment A). As a result of that study, a site of historical age was recorded that coincided with the entire project area. Designated 33-023901 (CA-RIV-11736H) in the California Historical Resources Inventory, the site represented an orange grove that had been cultivated on the property since 1902, along with associated irrigation features and a wind machine (ibid.:18-21). At the end of the 2014 study, McKenna (ibid.:28-39) concluded that Site 33-023901 did not meet any of the established significance criteria and thus did not qualify as a “historical resource” under CEQA. In 2019, McKenna et al. updated the 2014 study and again concluded that no significant cultural resources were present in the project area (McKenna 2019; see Attachment B). Since there had been no change to the property, however, no supplemental research or field investigations were performed at the time (ibid.).
CRM TECH
1016 E. Cooley Drive, Suite A/8
Colton, CA 92324
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 2 Figure 1. Project location. (Based on USGS Riverside West and Lake Mathews, Calif., 7.5’ quadrangles)
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 3 Figure 2. Recent satellite image of the project area.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 4 As 10 years have passed since the last known fieldwork on this property, the present study was designed and implemented to update the findings of the 2014 study. Research procedures completed during this study included an update to the historical/archaeological resources records search, a Sacred Lands File search, supplemental historical background research, and a field inspection of the project area. A summary of the methods and results of these procedures is presented below, along with the final conclusion of the study.
Historical/Archaeological Resources Records Search
On February 8, 2024, CRM TECH archaeologist Nina Gallardo, B.A., completed the records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), University of California, Riverside. The results of the records search indicate that the 2014 McKenna et al. survey remains the only systematic cultural resources study within the project area (Fig. 3). Since the completion of that survey, the only study that has involved the project location or any of the adjacent properties is a linear survey along a water pipeline alignment within the La Sierra Avenue right-of-way, which also took place in 2014 (Fig. 3).
The records search further indicates that no additional cultural resources have been identified within or adjacent to the project area since 2014. Within a one-mile radius, the records search identified a total of 24 previously recorded cultural resources, an increase of 10 from the 14 resources reported in the 2014 McKenna et al. survey. None of these localities was found in the immediate vicinity of the project area, and thus none of them requires further consideration during this study.
Sacred Lands File Search
On February 7, 2024, CRM TECH submitted a written request to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for an update to the Sacred Lands File search completed on the project vicinity during the 2014 study. In response, the NAHC stated in a letter dated February 28 that the Sacred Lands File identified no Native American tribal cultural resources in or near the project area. The NAHC recommended that local Native American groups be consulted for further information and provided a referral list of potential contacts for that purpose. The NAHC’s reply is attached to this report in Attachment C for reference by the City of Riverside in future government-to-government consultations with the pertinent tribal groups, if necessary.
Historical Research
As a part of this study, CRM TECH archaeologist Hunter O’Donnell, B.A., pursued additional historical background research using sources not referenced in the 2014 study, primarily aerial and satellite photographs of the project area. Taken between 1931 and 2023, the aerial and satellite photographs are available from the Nationwide Environmental Title Research (NETR) Online website, the Google Earth software, and the Geospatial Collection of the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB).
The 2014 study established that the project area was used for horticulture at least by 1900-1902, and it found no evidence of any residential use of the property from historical maps or census data (McKenna 2014:11-13). Early aerial photographs of the property, however, show what appear to PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 5 Figure 3. Previous cultural resources studies in the vicinity of the project area, listed by EIC file number. Locations of historical/archaeological resources are not shown as a protective measure.
D Project area
D Areas previously
surveyed
--Linear surveys
SCALE 1 :24,000
1 ooo o 1000 2000 feet
~.,,.
:-.i;+ •
:-_--_.
Scope ~f {:):-:--. •
records /-~ :i!,5; arch .::,.::-::•-.. ••
:··::··';_- ·:: :::/::.:---· ·-:::-~:=·.:.-- ~,. ,I
...... ,,., ,., , ' ,
I
... .·= • • •.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 6 have been a residence and an ancillary building near the western corner of the property in 1931 and 1938, just to the east of the intersection of La Sierra Avenue (historically Taylor Street) and Victoria Avenue (UCSB 1931; 1938). By 1948, both of these buildings had been removed, and trees had been planted in their place (NETR Online 1948).
After that, the project area was completely covered by the citrus grove until sometime between 1998 and 2002, when some of the trees in the easternmost portion of the parcel were removed (NETR Online 1948-2002; UCSB 1962; Google Earth 1994-2002). All of the built-environment features observed in that area during the 2014 survey, such as the play area and the paved driveway with a circular turnaround at the end, were built or installed over the next few years, along with a few sheds and what appear to have been trailers (NETR Online 2002-2009; Google Earth 2002-2009). Since then, most of the structures have been gradually removed (NETR Online 2009-2020; Google Earth 2009-2024).
Field Inspection
On March 13, 2024, Hunter O’Donnell carried out the field inspection of the project area. The survey was conducted at an intensive level by walking between the rows of orange trees in a series of parallel northwest-southeast transects spaced approximately 15 meters (50 feet) apart. Ground visibility was generally poor throughout the project area due to the accumulation of fallen leaves and areas of dense, low-lying vegetation growth (Fig. 4). Considering the extent of past ground disturbance in the project area, however, the ground visibility was deemed not to be a major hindrance to the survey efforts.
During the field inspection, a prehistoric (i.e., Native American) isolate was found adjacent to a concrete irrigation head in the citrus grove, consisting of a large portable granitic metate with two milling slicks on the surface (Fig. 5). The metate measures 60.7 x 38.5 x 21.2 centimeters, with one slick measuring 30.8 x 15.9 centimeters and the other 21.6 x 15.4 centimeters. Both slicks exhibit a moderate amount of polish with the high points noticeably worn down. At some point a cement mix was splashed on the artifact, probably during construction of the nearby irrigation line, resulting in more than 17 pieces of hardened concrete affixed to its surface, including within one of the slicks.
Given the clear evidence of past disturbances to the ground nearby, the artifact is unlikely to be in situ. The isolate was recorded into the California Historical Resources Inventory under the temporary designation of 4101-1, pending assignment of a permanent identification number by the EIC (see Attachment D).
Site 33-023901 was found to be largely in the same condition as originally recorded in 2014, although the orange grove and its trees appeared to show signs of neglect, while the modern features in the eastern portion of the site, such as the driveway and the sheds, had fallen into disrepair. A notable discrepancy from the 2014 site record is the location of the master valve bearing the “SNOW MFG. CO., LA CAL” steel gate stamp. The site record indicates that it was found along Victoria Avenue, but the master valve encountered during the survey, which bears the same steel gate stamp and matches photographs in the 2014 documentation (Fig. 6), is located in the eastern corner of the property, 110 feet southeast of the end of Millsweet Place and 630 feet southeast of Victoria Avenue.
It is possible that a second master valve was once located along Victoria Avenue but has since been removed, but it seems unlikely. An update to the 2014 site record is presented in Attachment D.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 7 Figure 4. Current condition of the project area. (Photograph taken on March 13, 2022; view to the southeast)
Figure 5. Granitic metate recorded as Isolate 4101-1.
(Photograph taken on March 13, 2024)
Figure 6. Master valve at the eastern end of Site 33-
023901. (Photograph taken on March 13, 2024; view
to the west)
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 8 No other cultural resources were encountered within the project boundaries during the field inspection, and no remnants of the buildings observed in the 1930s aerial photographs were found at their former locations. Scattered modern refuse was noted across the project area, but none of the items was of any historical/archaeological interest.
Conclusion and Recommendations
In summary of the research results presented above, Site 33-023901, consisting of the entire citrus grove in the project area and associated features, and Isolate 4101-1, consisting of a granitic metate, were the only cultural resources identified within the project area during this study. Site 33-023901 was previously determined not to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources or for local designation by the City of Riverside (McKenna 2014:28-39), and this study has not discovered any new information that would necessitate revisiting that conclusion. Therefore, the site does not appear to constitute a “historical resource” under CEQA provisions. Isolate 4101-1, a locality with fewer than three artifacts, by definition does not qualify as an archaeological site due to the lack of contextual integrity. As such, it does not meet the threshold of a potential “historical resource” and requires no further consideration in the CEQA compliance process.
Based on these considerations, the present study concludes that no “historical resources” are known to be present within the project area. Therefore, the final conclusion of the 2014 study that no known “historical resources” would be affected by the development of the property (McKenna 2014:39) remains valid and appropriate. However, in light of the recent discovery of the isolated metate in the project area from uncertain provenience and the presence of previously recorded prehistoric sites nearby (see McKenna 2014:16), CRM TECH recommends that all grubbing, grading, trenching, excavations, and other earth-moving activities reaching beyond the disturbed surface soil, generally speaking up to two feet in depth, be monitored by a qualified archaeologist to ensure the timely identification and, if necessary, protection of any buried deposits of prehistoric cultural remains. The monitoring program should be coordinated with the local Native American groups, who may wish to participate. Under this condition, CRM TECH further recommends that the proposed project may be cleared to proceed in compliance with the cultural resource provisions.
Thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,
Daniel Ballester, M.S.
Field Director, CRM TECH
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies 9 References Cited
McKenna, A. Jeanette
2014 A Cultural Resources Investigation of Assessor Parcel No. 136-220-016, TTM 36317, Located in the City of Riverside, Riverside Co., California. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. (See Attachment A) 2019 TTM No. 36317 @ La Sierra and Victoria, Riverside, Riverside Co., California. On file, Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside. (See Attachment B) Google Earth
1994-2024 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity; taken in 1994, 2002, 2003-2006, 2009, 2011-2014, 2016-2020, and 2022-2024. Available through the Google Earth software.
NETR (Nationwide Environmental Title Research) Online
1948-2020 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity; taken in 1948, 1959, 1966, 1967, 1980, 1985, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020. http://www.historicaerials.com.
UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara)
1931-1962 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity; taken in 1931, 1938, and 1962. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/.
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
ATTACHMENT A
2014 CULTURAL RESOURCES STUDY
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies RI-9125
A CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION
OF ASSESSOR PARCEL NO, 136-220-016,
TTM 36317, LOCATED IN THE CITY
OF RIVERSIDE, RIVERSIDE
CO., CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
ADKAN Engineers
Attn: Charissa Leach
6879 Airport Drive
Riverside, California 92504
Prepared by:
McKENNA et al.
6008 Friends Avenue
Whittier, California 90601-3724
(562) 696-3852
[email protected]
Author and Principal Investigator: Jeanette A. McKenna , MA/RPA August 1, 2014 FINAL
Job No. 01-14-08-1657
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
INFORMATION CENTER DATA
Title: A Cultural Resources Investigation of Assessor Parcel No. 136-220-016, TTM 36137, Located in the City of Riverside, Riverside Co., California
Authors: Jeanette A. McKenna, Principal
Consulting Firm: McKenna et al.
6008 Friends Avenue
Whittier, California 90601-3724
(562) 696-3852
[email protected]
Date: August 1, 2014
For Submittal to: City of Riverside
Community Development Department, Historic Preservation, Neighborhoods and Urban Design Division
3900 Main Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 826-5557
Prepared for: Adkan Engineers
Attn: Bryan Ingersoll
6879 Airport Drive
Riverside, California 92504
(951) 688-0241
USGS Quadrangle: Riverside West (1980)
Project Size:
Keywords:
8.8 Acres
Riverside; Victoria Avenue; La Sierra Avenue; Moulton and Praed Subdivision; Arlington Heights; Orange Groves; Gage Canal; Windmills; Gabrielino; Luiseno; Cahuilla, Serrano PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... . iii LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... . iv INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... . 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ............................................................ 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................................................... 6 CULTURE HISTORY BACKGROUND .. . . .. . . .......... .. . ......... .. . . . . ........... ... . . . . ... . . . . ......... 7 METHODOLOGY . ............... .................. .. ... . . . . . . . . . ............. ..................... ........... ... . . . . .. 13 PREVIOUS RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 RESULTS OF THE FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ......................................................... 17 The Orchard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 The Irrigation Pipe and Valve System ........... ................ .. ... . . . . . .. .......... ...... .. ... . . . . . 19 The Wind Machine ............................................................................................... 21 EVLUATION CRITERIA..... ....................................................................................... 21 Federal Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 California State Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Local Riverside Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 HISTORIC CONTEXT ............................................................................................... 27 RES UL TS AND FINDINGS . . . . . .. . .............. ............ ... . . . . . . . . ...... .. . . . . . . . .... .. . . ........ ......... .. 28 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .... .. . . . . . . . ............... .... .. . . . . . . . . . . .......... ... 38 CERTIFICATION ....................................................................................................... 40 PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies Page
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 APPENDICES:
A. Professional Qualifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 B. Archaeological Records Search . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 C. Native American Consultation ....................................................................... C-1 D. Paleontological Overview .............................................................................. D-1 E. Supplemental Research Data .... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1 F. Photographic Record ..................................................................................... F-1 G. California DPR-523 Forms . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . .............. ........... .. ... . . . . . . .. . . ... ....... ... .. . . . G-1 ii
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
1. General Location of the Project Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Specific Location of the Project Area ............... .............. ............... ....................... 3
3. Assessor Parcel Map Illustrating the Current Project Area .. . . . . . ... . .. . . .......... ......... 4
4. Aerial Photograph Illustrating the Project Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Map of the W ½ Rancho El Sobrante de San Jacinto ( 1892-1895) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. A Portion of the Moulton and Praed Subdivision Map (ca. 1897) with the Current Project Area Delineated ........................ ..................................... ....... 12
7. An Example of the orchard Tree Rows at the Time of the Recent Survey . .. . . . . . . . . 19
8. Steel Gate , Snow Mfg. Company of Los Angeles ........................................... ..... 20
9. Wind Machine in Center of Property . .. ...... ........ ....... ....... ............ ......... ...... .. . . . . .. . . 22 iii
PR-2024-001656 (TM) Exhibit 8 - MND and Technical Studies