ATTACHMENT D
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
APPENDIX D
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
INVENTORY REPORT
APPENDIX D
Archaeological Resources Inventory Report
April 14, 2023 13383
Joe Hughes
Hughes Circuits, Inc.
546 South Pacific Street
San Marcos, California 92078
Subject: Archaeological Resources Inventory Report – Negative Findings for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Hughes:
This letter documents the negative findings archaeological resources inventory conducted by Dudek for the Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project (Project), located in the City of San Marcos, California ( Figure 1). The Project would consist of the development of a manufacturing building on a vacant lot adjacent to 546 South Pacific Street. The City of San Marcos (City) is the lead agency responsible for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with CEQA, Dudek performed a Phase I cultural resources inventory for the entire Project area. The Project area consists of an approximately 10.46-acres covering two parcels east of South Pacific Street ( Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 219 -223-20-00 and 219-223-22-00) (Figure 2).
Dudek conducted a records search for the proposed project including a surrounding one-mile radius buffer at the South Coastal Information Center ( SCIC). The records search did not identify any cultural resources within the Project area; however, eight cultural resources were identified within the one -mile radius. A Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) search was requested and results were negative. Outreach letters were mailed to all Native American group representatives included on the NAHC contact list and three responses have been received to date.
An intensive pedestrian survey of the Project area did not identify any cultural or built environment resources. While no cultural resources were identified within the Project area, the review of aerial photographs reveals that a majority of the Project area was not highly disturbed by earth moving activities. In addition, two tributaries are located within the Project area, which would have been an attractive resource for prehistoric people. Reoccurring alluvial action and flooding serve to support the development and presence of cultural deposits in the a rea. Since there are alluvial soils present throughout the Project area, there is a moderate potential that buried cultural resources deposits may be encountered during excavation. Dudek recommends full-time archaeological and Native American monitoring of initial ground disturbance within sediments that have the potential for containing cultural resources. Monitoring is required during trenching, clearing of the ground surface, or excavation. Once excavations reach maximum depth or geologic formation or bedrock where cultural deposits are not possible, the monitoring program will be concluded.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 2 APRIL 2023
1 Project Description and Location
The proposed Project is the development of a relatively flat, vacant 10.46-acre site located on the northeast corner of South Pacific Street in the western central region of the City of San Marcos, California. The Project site is located approximately one mile south of Highway 78, approximately one mile north of San Marcos High School, and approximately six miles west of Interstate 15. Adjacent land uses include mixed commercial development to the north and south, a public recreation park (Bradley Park) to the west, and undeveloped land to the east. The Las Posas Branch tributary to San Marcos Creek is located on the border of the western section of the Project area, and a second tributary runs through the Project area on the eastern side to San Marcos Creek. The Project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California U.S. Geological Survey 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 1).
The proposed Project consists of the development of a 67,410 -square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed Project site to the south, at 546 S outh Pacific Street. The 67,410-square foot building includes a 56,310square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 -square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The Project area consists of an approximately 10.46-acres covering two parcels east of South Pacific Street (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 219-223-20-00 and 219-223-22-00) (Figure 2). The area surveyed was approximately 14 acres, but the Project area has since been reduced to 10.46 acres. 2 Regulatory Framework
2.1 The California Register of Historic Resources (Public Resources Code section 5020 et seq.)
Under CEQA , the term “historical resource” includes but is not limited to “any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or arch aeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California” (California Public Resources Code section 5020.1(j)). In 1992, th e California legislature established the CRHR “to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (California Public Resources Code section 5024.1(a)). A resource may be listed as an historical resource in the CRHR if it meets any of the following National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) criteria:
▪ Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
▪ Associated with the lives of persons important in our past. ▪ 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. ▪ Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 3 APRIL 2023
(California Public Resources Code section 5024.1(c).) R esources less than 50 years old are not considered for listing in the CRHR, but may be considered if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand the historical importance of the resource (see 14 CCR, section 4852(d)(2)).
The CRHR protects cultural resources by requiring evaluations of the significance of prehistoric and historic resources. The criteria for the CRHR are nearly identical to those for the NRHP, and properties listed or formally designated as eligible for listing on th e NRHP are automatically listed on the CRHR, as are the State Historical Landmarks numbered 770 or higher and California Points of Historical Interest. The CRHR also includes properties designated under local ordinances or identified through local historic al resource surveys. The State Historic Preservation Officer maintains the CRHR.
2.2 Native American Historic Cultural Sites (California Public Resources Code section 5097 et seq.)
State law addresses the disposition of Native American burials in archaeological sites and protects such remains from disturbance, vandalism, or inadvertent destruction; establishes procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project; and establishes the NRHC to resolve disputes regarding the disposition of such remains. In addition, the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act makes it a misdemeanor punishable by up to 1 year in jail to deface or destroy an Indian historic or cultural site that is listed or may be eligible for listing in the CRHR.
2.3 California Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act
The California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (California Repatriation Act), enacted in 2001, required all state agencies and museums that receive state funding and that have possession or control over collections of human remains or cultural items, as defined, to complete an inventory and summary of these remains and items on or before January 1, 2003, with certain exceptions. The California Repatriation Act also provides a process for the identification and repatriation of these items to the appropriate tribes.
2.4 California Environmental Quality Act
As described further below, the following CEQA statutes and CEQA Guidelines are of relevance to the analysis of archaeological and historic resources:
California Public Resources Code section 21083.2(g): Defines “unique archaeological resource.” California Public Resources Code section 21084.1 and CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5( a): Define historical resources. In addition, CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(b) defines the phrase “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource; ” it also defines the circumstances when a project would materially impair the significance of a historical resource.
California Public Resources Code section 5097.98 and CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(e): Set forth standards and steps to be employed following the accidental discovery of human remains in any location other than a dedicated ceremony.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 4 APRIL 2023
California Public Resources Code sections 21083.2(b)-(c) and CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4: Provide information regarding the mitigation framework for archaeological and historic resources, including options of preservation-in-place mitigation measures; preservation-in-place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to significant archaeological sites because it maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context, and may also help avoid conflict with religious o r cultural values of groups associated with the archaeological site(s).
Under CEQA, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it may cause “a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource ” (California Public Resources Code section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(b)). If a site is either listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or if it is included in a local register of historic resources, or identified as significant in a historical resources survey (meeting the requirements of California Public Resources Code section 5024.1(q)), it is a “historical resource ” and is presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of CEQA (California Public Resources Code section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(a)). The lead agency is not precluded from determining that a resource is a historical resource even if it does not fall within this presumption (California Public Resources Code section 21084.1; CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(a)).
A “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource ” reflecting a significant effect under CEQA means “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired” (CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(b)(1); California Public Resources Code section 5020.1(q)). In turn, the significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project:
Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register; or
Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirements of section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.
See Section 2.7, below for a discussion of the CEQA guidelines for determining significance and mitigating impacts to unique archaeological resources.
2.5 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98
CEQA Guidelines Section 150064.5 assigns special importance to human remains and specifies procedures to be used when Native American remains are discovered. As described below, these procedures are detailed in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 5 APRIL 2023
California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains shall occur until the County coroner has examined the remains (California Health and Safety Section 7050.5[b]). If the coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours (California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5[c]). In accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(a), the NAHC will notify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner, the MLD may inspect the site of discovery. Within 48 hours of being granted access to the site, the MLD may recommend means of treatment or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and associated grave goods.
2.6 Assembly Bill 52
California Assembly Bill 52, which took effect July 1, 2015, establishes a consultation process between California Native American Tribes and lead agencies in order to address tribal concerns regarding project impacts and mitigation to “tribal cultural resources” (TCR). Public Resources Code section 21074(a) d efines TCRs and states that a project that has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change to a TCR is a project that may have an adverse effect on the environment. A TCR is defined as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, and object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is either:
listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR or a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k), or
determined by a lead agency , in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1(c).
2.7 Guidelines for Determining Significance
Section 15064.5(c) of CEQA applies to effects on archaeological sites and contains the following additional provisions regarding archaeological sites:
• When a project will impact an archaeological site, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is an historical resource, as defined in subsection (a).
• If a lead agency determines tha t the archaeological site is a historical resource, it shall refer to the provisions of Section 21084.1 of the Public Resources Code, and this section, Section 15126.4 of the Guidelines, and the limits contained in Section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code do not apply. • If an archaeological site does not meet the criteria defined in subsection (a), but does meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource in Section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code, the site shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of section 21083.2. The time and cost limitations described in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 (c–f) do not apply to surveys and site evaluation activities intended to determine whether the project location contains unique archaeological resources.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 6 APRIL 2023
• If an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor a historical resource, the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are noted in the Initial Study or Environmental Impact Report (EIR), if one is prepared to address impacts on other resources, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA process.
Section 15064.5(d) and (e) contain add itional provisions regarding human remains. Regarding Native American human remains, paragraph (d) provides:
When an initial study identifies the existence of, or the probable likelihood of, Native American human remains within the project, a lead agency shall work with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission as provided in Public Resources Code SS5097.98. The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the huma n remains and any items associated with Native American burials with the appropriate Native Americans as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Action implementing such an agreement is exempt from:
1. The general prohibition on disinterring, disturbing, or removing human remains from any location other than a dedicated cemetery (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5); and
2. The requirement of CEQA and the Coastal Act.
Under CEQA, an EIR is required to ev aluate any impacts on unique archaeological resources (California Public Resources Code section 21083.2.) A “unique archaeological resource” is defined as:
[A]n archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, witho ut merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. (California Public Resources Code section 21083.2(g)). An impact to a non -unique archaeological resource is not considered a significant environmental impact and such non -unique resources need not be further addressed in the EIR (Public Resources Code section 21083.2(a); CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(c)(4)).
As stated above, CEQA contains rules for mitigation of “unique archaeological resources.” For example, “[i]f it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. Examples of that treatment, in no order of preference, may include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
1. Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 7 APRIL 2023
2. Deeding archaeological sites into permanent conservation easements.
3. Capping or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building on the sites.
4. Planning parks, greenspace, or other op en space to incorporate archaeological sites.” (Pub. Resources Code section 21083.2(b)(1)-(4).)
Public Resources Code section 21083.2(d) states that “[e]xcavation as mitigation shall be restricted to those parts of the unique archaeological resource that would be damaged or destroyed by the project. Excavation as mitigation shall not be required for a unique archaeological resource if the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequen tial information from and about the resource, if this determination is documented in the environmental impact report.” The rules for mitigating impacts to archaeological resources to qualify as “historic resources” are slightly different.
According to CEQ A Guidelines section 15126.4(b), “[p]ublic agencies should, whenever feasible, seek to avoid damaging effects on any historic resource of an archaeological nature. The following factors shall be considered and discussed in an EIR for a project involving such an archaeological site:
A. Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context. Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.
B. Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, the following:
1. Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites;
2. Incorporation of sites within parks, greenspace, or other open space;
3. Covering the archaeological sites with a layer of chemically stable soil before building tennis courts, parking lots, or similar facilities on the site[; and]
4. Deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.
Thus, althoug h section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code, in addressing “unique archaeological sites,” provides for specific mitigation options “in no order of preference,” CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(b), in addressing “historical resources of an archaeological nature,” provides that “[p]reservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites.”
Under CEQA, “[w]hen data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation,” the lead agency may cause to be prepared and adopt a “data recovery plan,” prior to any excavation being undertaken. The data recovery plan must make “provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the historical resource.” (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(b)(3)(C).) The data recovery plan also “must be deposited with the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center.” ( Ibid.) Further, “[i]f an artifact must be removed during project excavation or testing, curation may be an appropriate mitigation.” (Ibid.) TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 8 APRIL 2023
However, “[d]ata recovery shall not be required for an historical resource if the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequential information from and about the archaeological or historic resource, provided that determination is documented in the EIR and that the studies are deposited with the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center.” (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.4(b)(3)(D).)
2.8 City of San Marcos General Plan
The Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan (adopted in 2012 and updated in 2013) describes the cultural and paleontological resources, regulatory framework, and policies and plans to protect such resources (City of San Marcos 2013). The planning goals and policies are described below.
The City of San Marcos Goal COS -1, in the Goals and Policies section, consists of three policies to assist in the implementation of preserving paleontological resources. The City’s goal is to “continue to identify and evaluate cultural, historical, archaeological, paleontological, and architectural resources for protection from demolition and inappropriate actions” in compliance with CEQA guidelines (City of San Marcos 2013). 3 Project Background
3.1 Existing Conditions
The approximately 10.46-acre Project area is vacant and located on the northeast corner of South Pacific Street in the western central region of the City of San Marcos, California. Adjacent land uses include mixed com mercial development to the north and south, a public recreation park (Bradley Park) to the west, and undeveloped land to the east. The Project area is relatively flat, a San Diego County Water Authority right-of-way and a dirt walking path bisect the site. Elevation ranges from approximately 520 feet above mean sea level in the eastern portion of the Project area to 535 feet above mean sea level in the northwest portion of the Project area. The Las Posas Branch tributary to San Marcos Creek is located on th e border of the western section of the Project area, and a second tributary runs through the Project area on the eastern side to San Marcos Creek.
3.2 Prehistoric Context
Evidence for continuous human occupation in the San Diego County region spans the las t 12,000 years. Various attempts to parse out variability in archaeological assemblages over this broad time frame have led to the development of several cultural chronologies; some of these are based on geologic time, most are based on temporal trends in archaeological assemblages, and others are interpretive reconstructions. Each of these reconstructions describes essentially similar trends in assemblage composition in more or less detail. This research employs a common set of generalized terms used to describe chronological trends in assemblage composition from an archaeological perspective: Paleoindian (pre-5500 BC), Archaic (8000 BC.–AD 500), Late Prehistoric (AD 500– 1750), and Ethnohistoric (post-AD 1750). Native American aboriginal lifeways did not cease at European contact. “Protohistoric” refers to the chronological trend of continued Native American aboriginal lifeways at the cusp of the recorded historic period in the Americas. The tribal cultural context spans all of the archaeologically based chronologies further described below.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 9 APRIL 2023
3.2.1 Paleoindian Period (pre-5500 BC)
Evidence for Paleoindian occupation in coastal Southern California is tenuous, especially considering the fact that the oldest dated archaeological assemblages look nothing like the Paleoindian artifacts from the Great Basin. One of the earliest dated archaeological assemblages in coastal Southern California (excluding the Channel Islands) derives from P-37-004669 (CA-SDI-4669), in La Jolla. A human burial from P-37-004669 was radiocarbon dated to 9,590–9,920 years before present (approximately 95% probability) (Hector 2007). The burial is part of a larger site complex that contained more than 29 human burials associated with an assemblage that fits the Archaic profile (i.e., large amounts of groundstone, battered cobbles, and expedient flake tools). In contrast, typical Paleoindian assemblages include large stemmed projectile points, high proportions of formal lithic tools, bifacial lithic reduction strategies, and relatively small proportions of groundstone tools. Prime examples of this pattern are sites that were studied by Emma Lou Davis (1978) on China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station near Ridgecrest, California. These sites contained fluted and unfluted stemmed points and large numbers of formal flake tools (e.g., shaped scrapers, blades). Other typical Paleoindian sites include the Komodo site (MNO -679)—a multicomponent fluted point site, and MNO-680—a single component Great Basin stemmed point site (Basgall et al. 2002). At MNO-679 and MNO- 680, groundstone tools were rare while finely made projectile points were common.
Turning back to coastal Southern California, the fact that some of the earliest dated assemblages are dominated by processing tools runs counter to traditional no tions of mobile hunter –gatherers traversing the landscape for highly valued prey. Evidence for the latter—that is, typical Paleoindian assemblages—may have been located along the coastal margin at one time, prior to glacial desiccation and a rapid rise in sea level during the early Holocene (pre-7500 BP) that submerged as much as 1.8 km of the San Diego coastline. If this were true, however, it would also be expected that such sites would be located on older landforms near the current coastline. Some sites, such as P-37-000210 (CA-SDI-210) along Agua Hedionda Lagoon, contained stemmed points similar in form to Silver Lake and Lake Mojave projectile points (pre-8000 BP) that are commonly found at sites in California’s high desert (Basgall and Hall 1990). P -37-000210 yielded one corrected radiocarbon date of 8520 –9520 BP (Warren et al. 2004). However, sites of this nature are extremely rare and cannot be separated from large numbers of milling tools that intermingle with old projectile point forms.
Warren et al. (2004) claimed that a biface manufacturing tradition present at the Harris site complex P-37-000149 (CA-SDI-149) is representative of typical Paleoindian occupation in the San Diego County region that possibly dates between 10,365 and 8200 BC (Warren et al. 2004, p. 26). Termed San Dieguito (Rogers 1945), assemblages at the Harris site are qualitatively distinct from most others in the San Diego County region because the site has large numbers of finely made bifaces (including projectile points), formal f lake tools, a biface reduction trajectory, and relatively small amounts of processing tools (Warren 1964, 1968). Despite the unique assemblage composition, the definition of San Dieguito as a separate cultural tradition is hotly debated. Gallegos (1987) suggested that the San Dieguito pattern is simply an inland manifestation of a broader economic pattern. Gallegos’ interpretation of San Dieguito has been widely accepted in recent years, in part because of the difficulty in distinguishing San Dieguito components from other assemblage constituents. In other words, it is easier to ignore San Dieguito as a distinct socioeconomic pattern than it is to draw it out of mixed assemblages.
The large number of finished bifaces (i.e., projectile points and non-projectile blades), along with large numbers of formal flake tools at the Harris site complex, is very different than nearly all other assemblages throughout the San Diego County region, regardless of age. Warren et al. (2004) made this point, tabulating basic ass emblage constituents for key early Holocene sites. Producing finely made bifaces and formal flake tools implies that relatively TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 10 APRIL 2023
large amounts of time were spent for tool manufacture. Such a strategy contrasts with the expedient flake -based tools and cobble-core reduction strategy that typifies non -San Dieguito Archaic sites. It can be inferred from the uniquely high degree of San Dieguito assemblage formality that the Harris site complex represents a distinct economic strategy from non-San Dieguito assemblages.
If San Dieguito truly represents a distinct socioeconomic strategy from the non -San Dieguito Archaic processing regime, its rarity implies that it was not only short-lived, but that it was not as economically successful as the Archaic strategy. Such a conclusion would fit with other trends in southern California deserts, wherein hunting-related tools are replaced by processing tools during the early Holocene (Basgall and Hall 1993).
2.2.2 Archaic Period (8,000 BC – AD 500)
The more than 2500-year overlap between the presumed age of Paleoindian occupations and the Archaic period highlights the difficulty in defining a cultural chronology in the San Diego County region. If San Dieguito is the only recognized Paleoindian component in the San Diego County r egion, then the dominance of hunting tools implies that it derives from Great Basin adaptive strategies and is not necessarily a local adaptation. Warren et al. (2004) admitted as much, citing strong desert connections with San Dieguito. Thus, the Archaic pattern is the earliest local socioeconomic adaptation in the San Diego County region (Hale 2001, 2009).
The Archaic pattern is relatively easy to define with assemblages that consist primarily of processing tools:
millingstones, handstones, battered cobbles, heavy crude scrapers, incipient flake -based tools, and cobble -core reduction. These assemblages occur in all environments across the San Diego County region, with little variability in tool composition. Low assemblage variability over time and space am ong Archaic sites has been equated with cultural conservatism (Byrd and Reddy 2002; Warren 1968; Warren et al. 2004). Despite enormous amounts of archaeological work at Archaic sites, little change in assemblage composition occurs until the bow and arrow i s adopted at around AD 500, as well as ceramics at approximately the same time (Griset 1996; Hale 2009). Even then, assemblage formality remains low. After the bow is adopted, small arrow points appear in large quantities and already low amounts of formal flake tools are replaced by increasing amounts of expedient flake tools. Similarly, shaped millingstones and handstones decrease in proportion relative to expedient, unshaped groundstone tools (Hale 2009). Thus, the terminus of the Archaic period is equall y as hard to define as its beginning because basic assemblage constituents and patterns of manufacturing investment remain stable, complimented only by the addition of the bow and ceramics.
2.2.3 Late Prehistoric Period (AD 500 - 1769)
The period of time following the Archaic and prior to Ethnohistoric times (AD 1750) is commonly referred to as the Late Prehistoric (M. Rogers 1945; Wallace 1955; Warren et al. 2004). However, several other subdivisions continue to be used to describe various shifts in assemblage composition, including the addition of ceramics and cremation practices. In northern San Diego County, the post-AD 1450 period is called the San Luis Rey Complex (True 1978).
Rogers (1929) also subdivided the last 1,000 years into the Yuman II and III cultures, based on the distribution of ceramics. Despite these regional complexes, each is defined by the addition of arrow points and ceramics, and the widespread use of bedrock mortars. Vagaries in the appearance of the bow and arrow and ceramics make the temporal resolution of the San Luis Rey complex difficult. For this reason, the term Late Prehistoric is well-suited to describe the last 1,500 years of prehistory in the San Diego region.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 11 APRIL 2023
Temporal trends in socioeconomic adaptations during the Late Pr ehistoric period are poorly understood. This is partly due to the fact that the fundamental Late Prehistoric assemblage is very similar to the Archaic pattern, but includes arrow points and large quantities of fine debitage from producing arrow points, ceramics, and cremations.
The appearance of mortars and pestles is difficult to place in time because most mortars are on bedrock surfaces; bowl mortars are actually rare in the San Diego County region. Some argue that the Ethnohistoric intensive acorn economy extends as far back as AD 500 (Bean and Shipek 1978). However, there is no substantial evidence that reliance on acorns, and the accompanying use of mortars and pestles, occurred prior to AD 1400. True (1980) argued that acorn processing and ceramic use in the northern San Diego region did not occur until the San Luis Rey pattern emerged after approximately AD 1450.
2.2.4 Ethnohistoric (post-AD 1769)
Early descriptions of the lifeways of Southern California ethnohistoric groups were provided by explorers, missionaries, administrators, and other travelers, who gave particular attention to the coastal populations (Boscana 1846; Fages 1937; Geiger and Meighan 1976; Harrington 1934; Laylander 2000). Subsequent ethnographers in the early twentieth century were able to give much more objective, detailed, and penetrating accounts. Most of the ethnographers attempted to distinguish between observations of the customs of surviving Native Americans and orally transmitted or inferred information concerning the lifeways of native groups prior to European intrusion into the region. The second of these subjects provides a terminal baseline for discussing the cultures of the region’s prehistory. Despite the relatively rich ethnographic record, attempts to distinguish betwe en the archaeological residues that were produced by the linguistically unrelated but culturally similar Luiseño and Ipai/Kumeyaay have been largely unsuccessful (Pigniolo 2004; True 1966).
The first systematic ethnographic work in California was done in 1871 and 1872 by Stephen Powers (Heizer 1978); in 1877, Powers collected and printed his ethnographic observations in Tribes of California (Powers 1877). Prior to the work of Powers, there were limited records and accounts that might be broadly considered a s ethnohistorical data, such as Boscana (1846). At the beginning of the twentieth century, Alfred L. Kroeber and others began four decades of systematic documentation of tribal ethnographies. Kroeber’s (1925) monumental work on the Indians of California continues to be an authoritative source of information. It is important to note that even though there were many informants for these early ethnographies who were able to provide information from personal experiences about native life before the Europeans, a significantly large proportion of these informants were born after 1850 (Heizer and Nissen 1973); therefore, the documentation of pre -contact, aboriginal culture was being increasingly supplied by individuals born in California after considerable contact with Europeans. As Robert F. Heizer (1978) stated, this is an important issue to note when examining these ethnographies, since considerable culture change had undoubtedly occurred by 1850 among the Native American survivors of California. Nonetheless, the enormous value of the ethnographies done under Kroeber’s guidance is obvious. The major sources for this review include Lowell John Bean and Florence C. Shipek (1978), Kroeber (1925), Philip S. Sparkman (1908), and Raymond White (1963).
San Marcos is situated within the ethnohistoric territory of the Native American Luiseño cultural group, according to Kroeber’s study (1925; see also Rivers 1993). The Luiseño language belongs to the Cupan group of the Takic language branch of the Uto -Aztecan language family. Luiseño is a term given to Native Americans under the administration of Mission San Luis Rey, and later applied specifically to the Payomkawichum ethnic nation who were present in the region where the mission was founded. Meaning the “western pe ople,” the name Payomkawichum can also be applied to the closely related coastal Luiseño who lived north of the mission.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 12 APRIL 2023
Luiseño territory was situated in the north half of San Diego County and the western edge of Riverside County. Their lands encompassed the southern Santa Margarita Mountains and the Palomar Mountains, and their foothills to the Pacific Ocean. The territory extended eastward into the San Jacinto Valley and the western foothills of the San Jacinto Mountains. Their neighbors to the north were the Juaneño (Acjachemen) who spoke a Luiseño dialect, the Cahuilla and Cupeño to the east who spoke other Takic Cupan languages, and the Ipai (Kumeyaay) to the south who spoke a California-Delta Yuman language.
The Luiseño resided in permanent villages and associated seasonal camps. Village population ranged from 50 – 400 with social structure based on lineages and clans. A single lineage was generally represented in smaller villages, while multiple lineages and a dominant clan presided in larger villages. Each clan/village owned a resource territory and was politically independent, yet maintained ties to others through economic, religious, and social networks in the immediate region. There were contact period villages in the vicinity of this segment, near the towns of Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido, but researchers have been unable to place rancheria names from the mission registers with these locations.
Like other Indigenous California groups, the primary food staple was the acorn (Bean and Shipek 1978), supplemented by other plant resources, fish, shellfish, waterfowl, and marine and terrestrial mammals. Villages were situated near reliable sources of water, needed for the daily leaching of milled acorn flour. Other plant foods included pine nuts and grass seeds, manzanita, sunflower, sage, chia, lemonade berry, wild rose, holly-leaf cherry, prickly pear, and lamb’s quarter. Large and small prey included deer, antelope, rabbit, jackrabbit, wood rat, mice, and ground squirrel, as well as quail, ducks, and other birds. Fish, such as trout, were caught in rivers and creeks.
The first direct European contact with the Luiseño occurred in July 1769 with the Spanish expedition led by Gaspar de Portolá. During the next six years, eight missions and forts were founded north and south of Luiseño territory. In 1776, Mission San Juan Capistrano was founded less than 10 miles north, and the populations of five northern Luiseño villages had been halved within 15 years. In 1798, Mission San Luis Rey was established within Luiseño territory, and the proselytizing among the Payomkawichum began in earnest.
Several Luiseño leaders signed the statewide 1852 treaty, locally known as the Treaty of Temecula (an interior Luiseño village), but the U.S. Congress never ratified it. B y 1875, however, reservations for the Luiseño were established in the Palomar Mountains and nearby valleys, including Pala, Pauma, Rincon, Pechanga, and La Jolla. 4 Methods
4.1 Records Search
Dudek conducted a California Historical Resources Information Systems (CHRIS) records search of the Project area and a one -mile radius buffer at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) on January 31, 2022 . The records search results indicate that 53 previous cultural resources studies have been conducted within one -mile of the Project area. Of the 53 previous studies, five studies intersect the Project area and are listed in Table 1 below.
These studies consist primarily of an archaeological inventory report, two c ultural resource reconnaissance reports, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and a records search and literature review. Overall, 100% of the Project area has been previously studied. The studies that do not intersect the area are included in Confidential Appendix A.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 13 APRIL 2023
Table 1. Reports Intersecting Project Area
Report Number Authors Date Title
SD-00364 RMW Paleo
Associates
1988 Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of a Small
Section of a Tributary of San Marcos Creek, San
Marcos, San Diego County, California.
SD-01031 WESTEC Services,
Inc.
1983 Archaeological Report for Business/Industrial,
Richmar, Lake San Marcos and
Barham/Discovery Community Plan, San Marcos,
California
SD-02043 Michael Brandman
Associates, Inc.
1989 Draft Environmental Impact Report San Marco
Flood Control Channel San Marcos Creek/Las
Posas Reach SCH #88061505
SD-02622 RMW PALEO
ASSOCIATES
1991 Cultural Resource Reconnaissance in Support of
Proposed Flood Control Improvements to San
Marcos Creek Within The City of San Diego
California
SD-14140 AFFINIS 2003 Archaeological Records Search and Literature Review, Vallecitos Water District Master Plan
Update San Diego County, California
The SCIC records search did not identify any cultural resources within the Project area. The records search did identify eight cultural resources within the one-mile search radius buffer of the Project area (Table 2). Of the total eight resources identified in the one-mile buffer, six are prehistoric resources and two are historic resources. The closest resource to the Project area is CA-SDI-12735, a prehistoric habitation site located approximately 0.2 miles from the Project area. The eight cultural resources are presented in Table 1 below. Due to the sensitivity of CA-SDI- 5633 and proximity of CA-SDI-12735, these resources are discussed in more detail below. No historic addresses are located within the Project area, however, two are located within the one-mile search radius. The results of the records search and all DPR forms are attached as part of Confidential Appendix A.
Table 2. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources in the One-Mile Record Search Radius
Primary Number Trinomial Age Description
In/ Out of
Project Area
P-37-005082 CA-SDI-5082 Prehistoric Lithic and shell scatter Out P-37-005633 CA-SDI-5633 Prehistoric Habitation site; human remains Out P-37-011663 CA-SDI-11663 Prehistoric Lithic scatter Out P-37-012735 CA-SDI-12735 Prehistoric Habitation site Out P-37-015162 N/A Prehistoric Isolate – Lithic flake Out P-37-030252 N/A Historic Single residential property Out P-37-032160 CA-SDI-20363 Prehistoric Habitation site Out P-37-033557 CA-SDI-5082 Historic Highway 395 Out
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 14 APRIL 2023
CA-SDI-5633
CA-SDI-5633 was recorded in 197 7 by R. Franklin as a prehistoric site consist ing of a series of bedrock milling features extending over an area of approximately 25 -square meters. Gallegos and Pigniolo conducted a testing program in 1990 and determined CA-SDI-5633 to be significant under CEQA criteria. Ogden Environmental Services Inc. conducted a testing program in 1996 wit hin the right -of-way for the San Diego Northern Railroad. A total of seven shovel test pits (STPs), two north of the tracks and five south of the tracks were excavated; one STP on the south edge of the right -of-way was positive. Gallegos & Associates excav ated four STPs within the right -of-way to clarify the site boundary in 2000. In 2001, CA-SDI-5633 was recommended as eligible for nomination listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
Gallegos & Associates conducted a data recovery progr am to mitigate development impacts to CA-SDI-5633 in 2002. The data recovery program consisted of four phases of excavation: 27 sample units, 25 block units, 15 rapid recovery units, and 11 mechanically excavated trenches. The data recovery program reveale d artifacts such as projectile points, battered implements, cores, debitage, handstones, metate fragments, groundstone fragments, ceramic fragments, bone tools, and shell. The flake stone reduction technology at CA-SDI-5633 was exclusively related to arrow point production and rejuvenation; hunting and the preparation for hunting were major focuses of occupation at CA-SDI-5633, and the presence of milling features and shell also indicates that some food processing activities were also conducted at CA-SDI-5633. Human remains were recovered as part of the study and were repatriated for burial. Due to the presence of human remains, monitoring during construction by an archaeologist and a Native American was recommended.
In 2007, Gallegos & Associates conducted a monitoring program for construction activities performed adjacent to CA-SDI-5633 as the site was recommended for avoidance for the project. No cultural material was noted in the monitored areas adjacent to CA -SDI-5633. CA-SDI-5633 is located appro ximately 0.86 miles from the current proposed Project area. Due to the distance and commercial development located between CA-SDI-5633 and the Project area, the proposed current Project would not impact (directly or indirectly) CA-SDI-5633.
CA-SDI-12735
CA-SDI-12735 was recorded in 1979 by S. Cupples as a prehistoric lithic scatter measuring 190 m eters x 150 meters consisting of a handstone, over 45 flakes, a biface blank, cores, scrapers, hammerstones, and a chopper.
In 1992, RMW Paleo Associates conducted three excavation units which revealed that the site had few subsurface artifacts, and it was recommended that the controlled destruction of the site be monitored by archaeologists to mitigate the cultural deposit s during an upcoming grading of San Marc os Creek and its tributaries . A survey conducted by ASM Affiliates in 2006 revealed that CA-SDI-12735 was found to be in a fully-modified landscape that has been graded, disked, and subjected to stream channelization , and it was determined to be likely tha t the mitigative controlled destruction, as recommended by RMW Paleo Associates in 1992, had removed nearly all of the cultural deposits, destroying the site. A survey conducted by ASM Affiliates in 2010 could not relocate CA-SDI- 12735 within the project area. CA-SDI-12735 is located approximately 0.22 miles from the current proposed Project area and is the closet site to the Project area. Due to the distance and commercial development located between CA-SDI-12735 and the Project area, the proposed current Project would not impact (directly or indirectly) CA-SDI- 12735.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 15 APRIL 2023
4.2 Archival Research
In addition to the SCIC records search, Dudek conducted an on -line review of historic aerial photographs of the Project area and general vicinity, to help determine the possible development and land use of the Project area in the past. Historic aerial photographs of the Project area were available for 1938, 1947, 1953, 1964, 1967, 1980- 1991, 1993-2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018 (NET R 2022). The historical aerials from 1938 to 1967 revealed that Project area was undeveloped. By 1978, some dirt trails can be observed within the area and to the north of the area, grading was observed, and two structures were developed. By 1980, the road for South Pacific Street is developed , the surrounding properties have been graded , and residential/commercial development is present. The aerials from 1981 -1984 do not reveal any changes to the area. By 1985, some light surface disturbance is observed within a small section of the southern area. The 1986 aerial shows some slight disturbance to the area in the form of dirt trails. The aerials from 1987-1994 do not reveal any changes to the area. The 1993 aerial shows some disturbance to the eastern portion of the area, and by 1996, dirt trails or a dirt road become more prominent within the area. The aerials from 1997 to 2018 do not reveal any changes to the area. The entire portion of the Project area has remained undeveloped. No historic structures are located within the Project area. The review of aerial photographs also reveals that a majority of the Project area has not been highly disturbed by earth moving activities
Historic topographic maps of the Project area were reviewed (earliest map available is 1893). A creek is observed within the western section of the Project area, however, on the 19 79 topographic map, the creek is no longer observed within the Project area. The historic topographic maps do not reveal any historic structures located within the Project area.
4.3 Review of Geomorphological Context
Geocon Incorporated completed a geotechnical report for the Project area (Geocon Incorporated 2021). The report details the results of six exploratory trenches to a maximum depth of 14 feet on September 1, 2021, however, the report only covered a small portion of the western section of the Project area. Undocumented fill was encountered to a depth of approximately 2 feet. Alluvium was encountered in all trenches to depths ranging between 3.5 to 10 feet. Tertiary-age Santiago Formation was encountered below the undocumented fill and alluvium across the site, at depths between 3.5 and 10 feet below existing grade.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Services (USDA 2022), three soil types are mapped in the Project area, including Las Flores loamy fine sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes, located in the central section of the Project area, Las Flores-Urban land complex, 2 to 9 percent slopes, located along the western border of the Project area, and Placentia sandy loam, thick surface, 0 to 2 percent slopes, located alon g the southern and eastern sections of the Project area. The Las Flores soil series generally occurs on hillslopes, formed in residuum weathered from siliceous calcareous sandstone, and are typically at an elevation of 700 feet, The Placentia soil series generally occur in settings with alluvial fans, formed in alluvium derived from granite, and are typically at elevations ranging from 50 to 2,500 feet. Reoccurring alluvial action and flooding serve to support the development and presence of cultural deposits in the area. Since there are alluvial soils present thr oughout the Project area, there is moderate potential for subsurface cultural resources.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 16 APRIL 2023
4.4 NAHC and Tribal Correspondence
Dudek requested a NAHC search of the SLF on January 31, 2022 for the Project area. The SLF consists of a database of known Native American resources. These resources may not be included in the SCIC database. The NAHC replied on March 24, 2022 with negative results (Appendix B). The NAHC additionally provided a list of Native American tribes and individuals/organizations with traditional geographic associations that might have knowledge of cultural resources in this area.
Outreach letters were mailed on March 24, 2022 to all Native American group representatives included on the NAHC contact list (Appendix B). These letters solicited, or attempted to elicit additional information relating to Native American resources that may be impacted by the Project. Native American representatives were requested to define a general area where known resources intersect the Project area. Three responses have been received to date. A response was received from the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians on April 25, 2022 stating that the Project is located within a culturally -sensitive area and the potential exists that the Project may impact tangible Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), Traditional Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), and potential Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). A response was received from the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians on April 26, 2022 stating that they are aware of cultural resources within close proximity to the proposed Project and recommends including a Luiseño Nat ive American monitor during all ground disturbing activities. A response was received from the San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians on May 5, 2022 stating that the Project is within their Traditional Use Area. The letters have been forwarded to the City and included in this report . No other communications between Dudek and the tribes has occurred since then. The NAHC correspondence is included in Appendix B.
In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the City, as lead agency, is responsible for conducting gov ernment to government consultation with pertinent tribal entities. The City mailed AB 52 notifications on May 3, 2022 to California Native American Tribal representatives (that have requested notification) who are traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed Project. Two tribes requested consultation under AB 52, including the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians on May 20, 2022, and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians on June 6, 2022. The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians agreed with the mitigation measures proposed by Dudek in this report, which includes archaeological and tribal monitoring, and protocols for the discovery of cultural material and human remains. Additionally, the Rincon Band of Luiseño proposed that if export of soil is planned, consultation with the affiliated tribes will have to be initiated, and this was included in the mitigation measures. The Rincon Band of Luiseño concluded AB 52 consultation on December 20, 2022. The San Luis Rey Band agreed with the proposed measures for tribal cultural resources (CUL -MM-1 through CUL-MM-4) for the Project’s environmental document.
The San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians concluded AB 52 consultation on January 12, 2023.
4.5 Intensive Pedestrian Survey
Dudek archaeologist Makayla Murillo conducted an intensive level pedestrian survey of the proposed Project area on February 3, 2022. Saving Sacred Sites Native American monitor VI’i Sialo’i participated in the pedestrian survey.
All survey work was conducted employing standard archaeological procedures and techniques consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Five-meter interval survey transects were conducted in an east-west direction for the Project area. Within the transects, the ground surface was examined for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., flaked stone tools, tool -making debris, stone milling tools, ceramics, fire -affected rock), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil depressions, features indicative of the current or former presence TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 17 APRIL 2023
of structures or buildings (e.g., standing exterior walls, post holes, foundations), and historic artifacts (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics, building materials). Ground disturbances such as burrows, cut banks, and drainages were also visually inspected for exposed subsurface materials.
The Project area is relatively flat and undeveloped. Some disturbances were observed, such as a dirt road on the eastern portion of the Project area, and a drainage feature from a sewer running north to south (Figure 3). Ground visibility was poor (0-20%) in areas where the ground surface was obscured by vegetation. Appro ximately 75% of the Project area was obscured by grass, thistles, Hardy ice plants, and sage (Figure 4). Modern debris (e.g., refuse) is strewn throughout the Project area and a homeless encampment was observed in the bushes on the northwestern portion of the Project area. The pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural or built environment resources within the Project area.
5 Summary and Management Considerations
5.1 Archaeological Recommendations
Dudek’s Phase I cultural resources inventory of the Project indicates that there is moderate sensitivity for identifying intact subsurface archaeological deposits during Project implementation. The SCIC records search , NAHC SLF search, and the pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural resources within the Project area, however, the review of aerial photographs also reveals that a majority of the Project area has not been highly disturbed by earth moving activities. In addition, two tributaries are located within the Project area, which would have been an attractive resource for prehistoric people. Reoccurring alluvial action and flooding serve to support the development and presence of cultural deposits in the area. Since there are alluvial soils present throughout the Project area, there is a moderate potential that buried cultural resources deposits may be encountered during excavation. Dudek recommends full-time archaeological and Native American monitoring of initial ground disturbance within sediments that have the potential for containing cultural resources. Monitoring is required during trenching, clearing of the ground surface, or excavation.
Once excavations reach maximum depth or geologic formation or bedrock where cultural deposits are not possible, the monitoring program will be concluded.
Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological Resources
In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are exposed during construction activities for the Project, all construction work occurring within 100 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the significance of the find. Construction activities may continue in other areas, but should be redirected a safe distance from the find. If the new discovery is evaluated and found to be significant under CEQA and avoidance is not feasible, additional work such as data recovery may be warranted. A data recovery plan shall be developed by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City and Native American representatives, if applicable. Ground disturbance can continue only after the resources has been properly mitigated and with approval by the City.
Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains
In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be immediately notified of the discovery. No further excavation or disturbance of the site or TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 18 APRIL 2023
any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, Native American, he or she shall notify the NAHC in Sacramento within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, the NAHC must immediately notify the person or persons it believes to be the MLD from the deceased Native American. The MLD shall complete inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site and make recommendations for the treatment and disposition, in consultation with the property owner, of the human remains.
Should you have any questions relating to this report and its findings , please do not hesitate to contact me at 619.949.3082 or [email protected].
Respectfully Submitted,
——————————
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
Att.: Figure 1, Project Location
Figure 2, Project Area Map
Figure 3. Drainage from sewer
Figure 4. Overview of western Project area
National Archaeological Database Information Sheet
Confidential Appendix A, SCIC Records Search Results
Appendix B, Tribal Correspondence
cc: Angela Pham, Micah Hale, Dudek
6 References
Bada, Jeffrey L., R. Gillespie, J. A. J. Gowlett, and R. E. M. Hedges. 1984. Accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon ages of amino acid extracts from Californian paleoindian skeletons. Nature 312(29):442- 444.
Basgall, Mark E. 1987. Paleoindian occupation in central-eastern California: the Komodo site. Current Research in the Pleistocene 4:50-54.
Basgall, Mark E. 1988. The archaeology of CA-MNO-679: a pre-Archaic site in Long Valley Caldera, Mono County, California. In Early human occupation in far western North America: the Clovis-Archaic interface, edited by J. Willig, C. M. Aikens, and J. Fagan. Nevada State Museum, Anthropological Papers 21.
Basgall, Mark E., and Matthew C. Hall. 1990. Adaptive variation in the north-central Mojave Desert. Paper presented at the The 55th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas, NV.
Basgall, Mark E., and Matthew C. Hall. 1993. Archaeology of the Awl Site, CA-SBR-4562, Fort Irwin, San Bernardino County, California. Submitted to Far Western Anthropological Research Group. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 19 APRIL 2023
Basgall, Mark E., L. Johnson, and Micah J. Hale. 2002. An evaluation of four archaeological sites in the Lead Mountain Training Area, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California.
Submitted to Submitted to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth, Texas.
Bean, Lowell J., and Florence C. Shipek. 1978. Luiseño. In Handbook of North American Indians: Volume 8, California, edited by Robert F. Hiezer, pp. 550-563. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.
Boscana, G. 1846. “Chinigchinich; A Historical Account of the Origin, Customs, and Traditions of the Indians at the Missionary Establishment of St. Juan Capistrano, Alta California.” In Life in California, by Alfred Robinson, 227-341. New York: Wiley & Putnam.
Byrd, Brian F., and Seetha N. Reddy. 2002. Late Holocene adaptations along the northern San Diego coastline:
new perspectives on old paradigms. In Catalysts to complexity: late Holocene societies of the California coast, edited by Jon M. Erlandson, and Terry L. Jones, pp. 41-62. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.
City of San Marcos General Plan. 2013. Accessed February 3, 2022. http://www.san- marcos.net/home/showpublisheddocument/8478/636597348039500000 Davis, Emma Lou. 1978. The ancient Californians: Rancholabrean hunters of the Mojave Lakes country. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Science Series No. 29, Los Angeles.
Erlandson, Jon M., Torben C. Rick, Terry L. Jones, and Judith F. Porcasi. 2007. One if by land, two if by sea: who where the first Californians? In California Prehistory: colonization, culture, and complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones, and Kathryn A. Klar, pp. 53-62. Alta Mira Press, Lanham, MD.
Fages, P. 1937. A Historical, Political, and Natural Description of California (1775). Translated by H.I. Priestly.
Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Fitzgerald, Richard T., and Michael F. Rondeau. 2012. A fluted projectile point from Crystal Cove State Park, Orange County, Alta California. California Archaeology 4(2):247-256.
Gallegos, Dennis R. (editor). 1987. San Dieguito-La Jolla: chronology and controversy. San Diego County Archaeological Society, Research Paper No. 1, San Diego.
Gallegos, Dennis R. (editor). 2017. First people: a revised chronology for San Diego County. StorySeekers, San Diego.
Geiger, M., and C. W. Meighan. 1976. As the Padres Saw Them: California Indian Life and Customs as Reported by the Franciscan Missionaries, 1813-1815. Santa Barbara, California: Santa Barbara Mission Archive Library.
Geocon Incorporated. 2021. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation: Hughes Circuits South Pacific Street, San Marcos, California. Submitted to Hughes Circuits, Incorporated.
Grenda, Donn R. 1997. Site structure, settlement systems, and social organization at Lake Elsinore, California.
PhD, Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 20 APRIL 2023
Hale, Micah J. 2001. Technological organization of the Millingstone Pattern in southern California. MA, Anthropology, California State University, Sacramento, Sacramento.
Hale, Micah J. 2009. Santa Barbara and San Diego: contrasting adaptive strategies on the southern California coast. PhD, Anthropology, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA.
Harrington, J.P. 1934. “A New Original Version of Boscana’s Historical Account of the San Juan Capistrano Indians of Southern California.” Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 92(4). Washington, D.C.
Heizer, R. 1978. “Introduction.” In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, 1–6. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, edited by W.C. Sturtevant. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Heizer, R. and K.M. Nissen. 1973. The Human Sources of California Ethnography. Berkeley, California: University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.
ICF 2013. (ICF International, Davis Geoarchaeological Research, Southeastern Archaeological Research) Inventory and analysis of coastal and submerged archaeological site occurrence on the Pacific Outer Continental Shelf. Submitted to U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo, CA.
Kennedy, Gail E. 1983. An unusual burial practice at an early California Indian site. Journal of New World Archaeology 5(3):4-7.
Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.
Laylander, D. 2000. Early Ethnography of the Californias, 1533-1825. Salinas, California: Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory No. 47.
McDonald, Meg, and James D Eighmey. 2004. Late Period prehistory in San Diego. Submitted to Prehistoric and historic archaeology of metropolitan San Diego: an historic properties background study, prepared for Metropolitan Wastewater Department, San Diego, California, by ASM Affiliates, Inc., Carlsbad, California.
NETR (National Environmental Title Research). 2019. Address search for 546 South Pacific Street, San Marcos, California. Accessed February 3, 2022. http://www.historicaerials.com/.
Pigniolo, A.R. 2004. “Points, Patterns, and People: Distribution of the Desert Side-Notched Point in San Diego.” Proceedings of the Society for California Archaeology 14:27–39.
Powers, S. 1877. Tribes of California. Contributions to North American Ethnology, Vol. III. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office. Reprinted by University of California Press, Berkeley, 1976.
Rivers, B. 1993. “The Pendleton Coast District: An Ethnographic and Historical Background.” In The Cultural Resources of the Pendleton Coast District. Manuscript on file at SAIC, Santa Barbara, California.
TO: MR. HUGHES
SUBJECT: ARCHAEOLGOICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT – NEGATIVE FINDINGS FOR THE HUGHES CIRCUITS
EXPANSION PROJECT, CITY OF SAN MARCOS, CALIFORNIA
13383 21 APRIL 2023
Rogers, Alexander K., and Robert M. Yohe. 2020. Obisidian hydration dating of proposed Paleoindian artifacts from Tulare Lake, California. California Archaeology 12(2):223-239.Rogers, Malcom J. 1945. An outline of Yuman prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1(2):167-198.
Schaefer, Jerry. 2012. Coastal brown ware ceramics from Camp Pendleton, San Diego County. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 48(1 & 2):25-46.
Sparkman, P.S. 1908. “The Culture of the Luiseño Indians.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 8:187–234.
True, D.L. 1980. “The Pauma Complex in Northern San Diego County: 1978.” Journal of New World Archaeology 3(4):1–39.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2022. Web Soil Survey. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey Staff. Accessed January 3, 2023. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Wallace, William J. 1955. A suggested chronology for Southern California coastal archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214-230.
Warren, Claude N. 1964. Cultural change and continuity on the San Diego Coast. PhD, Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.
Warren, Claude N. 1968. Cultural tradition and ecological adaptation on the southern California coast. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1-15.
Warren, Claude N., Gretchen Siegler, and Frank Dittmer. 2004. Paleoindian and early Archaic periods. Submitted to Prehistoric and historic archaeology of metropolitan San Diego: an historic properties background study, prepared for Metropolitan Wastewater Department, San Diego, California, by ASM Affiliates, Inc., Carlsbad, California.
White, R. 1963. “Luiseño Social Organization.” University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 48:91–194.
Date: 2/4/2022 - Last saved by: ckubacki - Path: Z:\Projects\j1338301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Cultural\Figure1_ProjectLocation.mxd 78 Project Location
Hughes Circuits Project
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series San Marcos Quadrangle
T ownship 12S / Range 3W / Section 16
02 , 0 0 0 1,000
Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 1
Chula Vista
Solana Beach
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
Lemon Grove
La Mesa
El Cajon
Santee
Poway
San
Marcos
Escondido
Vista
Imperial
Beach
National City
Del Mar
Coronado
Riverside
County
Mexico
905
209
75 52
163
282
188
195
54 125
74 56
86 78
67 76
94 79
8 15
805
5 Pacific Ocean
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
Project Site
Date: 2/18/2022 - Last saved by: ckubacki - Path: Z:\Projects\j1338301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Cultural\Figure2_APE.mxd
W SAN MARCOS BLVDW SAN MARCOS BLVD
SS
LLAA
SS
PP
OO
SS
AA
SS
RR
DD
AALLPPIINNEE PPLL
SS
PPAACCIIFFIICC
SS
TT
PACIFIC STPACIFIC ST
LLIINNDDAA VV II SS TTAA DDRR
SOURCE: SanGIS 2019
0 250 125
Feet
08 0 40
Meters
FIGURE 2
Project Area
Hughes Circuits Project
Project Area
FIGURES
13383
APRIL 2023
Figure 3. Drainage from sewer, view facing north.
Figure 4. Overview of western Project area, view facing west.
NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATABASE (NADB) INFORMATION
13383
APRIL 2023
National Archaeological Database (NADB) Information
Authors: Keshia Montifolca M.A., RPA and Makayla Murillo B.A.
Firm: Dudek
Project Proponent: Hughes Circuits, Inc.
Report Date: April 2023
Report Title: Archaeological Resources Inventory Report – Negative Findings for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project
Type of Study: Cultural Resources Inventory
Resources: None
USGS Quads: San Marcos , California, Township 12 South, Range 3 West, Section 16 Acreage: 10.46
Permit Numbers: N/A
Keywords: Pedestrian Survey, Inventory, Negative, City of San Marcos, Hughes Circuits Expansion
Confidential Appendix A
SCIC Records Search Results
Appendix B
NAHC Correspondence and Tribal Outreach
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
March 24, 2022
Makayla Murillo
Dudek
Via Email to: [email protected] & [email protected]
Re: Hughes Circuits MND (13383) Project, San Diego County
Dear Ms. Murillo:
A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.
Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated; if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.
If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: [email protected].
Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño
VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash
PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk
SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok
COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache
COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan
COMMISSIONER
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki
COMMISSIONER
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño
COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo
NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
Barona Group of the Capitan
Grande
Edwin Romero, Chairperson
1095
Barona Road
Lakeside, CA,
92040
Phone: (
619
)
443
-
6612
Fax: (
619
)
443-0681
[email protected]
Diegueno
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
Robert Pinto, Chairperson
4054
Willows Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
368
-
4382
Fax: (
619
)
445-9126
[email protected]
Diegueno
Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay
Indians
Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson
4054
Willows Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
933
-
2200
Fax: (
619
)
445-9126
[email protected]
Diegueno
Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
Virgil Perez, Chairperson
P.O. Box
130
Santa Ysabel, CA,
92070
Phone: (
760
)
765
-
0845
Fax: (
760
)
765-0320
Diegueno
Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
Clint Linton, Director of Cultural
Resources
P.O. Box
507
Santa Ysabel, CA,
92070
Phone: (
760
)
803
-
5694
cjlinton
73 @aol.com
Diegueno
Inaja-Cosmit Band of Indians
Rebecca Osuna, Chairperson
2005
S. Escondido Blvd.
Escondido, CA,
92025
Phone: (
760
)
737
-
7628
Fax: (
760
)
747-8568
Diegueno
Jamul Indian Village
Erica Pinto, Chairperson
P.O. Box
612
Jamul, CA,
91935
Phone: (
619
)
669
-
4785
Fax: (
619
)
669-4817
[email protected]
Diegueno
Jamul Indian Village
Lisa Cumper, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box
612
Jamul, CA,
91935
Phone: (
619
)
669
-
4855
[email protected]
Diegueno
Kwaaymii Laguna Band of
Mission Indians
Carmen Lucas,
P.O. Box
775
Pine Valley, CA,
91962
Phone: (
619
)
709
-
4207
Kwaaymii
Diegueno
La Jolla Band of Luiseno
Indians
Norma Contreras, Chairperson
22000
Highway
76 Pauma Valley, CA,
92061
Phone: (
760
)
742
-
3771
Luiseno
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
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 Resource Section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Hughes Circuits MND ( 13383
)
Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001372
03/24/2022 09:48 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/24/2022
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
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
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
Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians
Temet Aguilar, Chairperson
P.O. Box
369
Pauma Valley, CA,
92061
Phone: (
760
)
742
-
1289
Fax: (
760
)
742-3422
[email protected]
Luiseno
Pechanga Band of Indians
Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources
Coordinator
P.O. Box
1477
Temecula, CA,
92593
Phone: (
951
)
770
-
6306
Fax: (
951
)
506-9491
[email protected]
Luiseno
Pechanga Band of Indians
Mark Macarro, Chairperson
P.O. Box
1477
Temecula, CA,
92593
Phone: (
951
)
770
-
6000
Fax: (
951
)
695-1778
[email protected]
Luiseno
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
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 Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indians
San Luis Rey, Tribal Council
1889
Sunset Drive
Vista, CA,
92081
Phone: (
760
)
724
-
8505
Fax: (
760
)
724-2172
[email protected]
Luiseno
San Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indians
1889
Sunset Drive
Vista, CA,
92081
Phone: (
760
)
724
-
8505
Fax: (
760
)
724-2172
[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 Resource Section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Hughes Circuits MND ( 13383
)
Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001372
03/24/2022 09:48 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/24/2022
San Pasqual Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
Allen Lawson, Chairperson
P.O. Box
365
Valley Center, CA,
92082
Phone: (
760
)
749
-
3200
Fax: (
760
)
749-3876
[email protected]
Diegueno
San Pasqual Band of Diegueno
Mission Indians
John Flores, Environmental
Coordinator
P. O. Box
365
Valley Center, CA,
92082
Phone: (
760
)
749
-
3200
Fax: (
760
)
749-3876
[email protected]
Diegueno
Soboba Band of Luiseno
Indians
Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural
Resource Department
P.O. BOX
487
San Jacinto, CA,
92581
Phone: (
951
)
663
-
5279
Fax: (
951
)
654-4198
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Luiseno
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
Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay
Nation
Cody Martinez, Chairperson
1 Kwaaypaay Court
El Cajon, CA,
92019
Phone: (
619
)
445
-
2613
Fax: (
619
)
445-1927
[email protected]
Kumeyaay
Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay
Nation
Kristie Orosco, Kumeyaay
Resource Specialist
1 Kwaaypaay Court
El Cajon, CA,
92019
Phone: (
619
)
445
-
6917
Kumeyaay
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay
Indians
John Christman, Chairperson
1 Viejas Grade Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
445
-
3810
Fax: (
619
)
445-5337
Diegueno
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay
Indians
Ernest Pingleton, Tribal Historic
Officer, Resource Management
1 Viejas Grade Road
Alpine, CA,
91901
Phone: (
619
)
659
-
2314
[email protected]
Diegueno
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 Resource Section
5097.98
of the Public Resources Code.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Hughes Circuits MND ( 13383
)
Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001372
03/24/2022 09:48 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/24/2022
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Edwin (Thorpe) Romero, Chairperson
Barona Group of the Capitan Grande
1095 Barona Road
Lakeside, CA 92040
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Romero,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the exi sting operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
Date: 2/4/2022 - Last saved by: ckubacki - Path: Z:\Projects\j1338301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Cultural\Figure1_ProjectLocation.mxd 78 Project Location
Hughes Circuits Project
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series San Marcos Quadrangle
T ownship 12S / Range 3W / Section 16
02 , 0 0 0 1,000
Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 1
Chula Vista
Solana Beach
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
Lemon Grove
La Mesa
El Cajon
Santee
Poway
San
Marcos
Escondido
Vista
Imperial
Beach
National City
Del Mar
Coronado
Riverside
County
Mexico
905
209
75 52
163
282
188
195
54 125
74 56
86 78
67 76
94 79
8 15
805
5 Pacific Ocean
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
Project Site
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Ralph Goff, Chairperson
Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
36190 Church Road, Suite 1
Campo, CA 91906
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Goff,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development o f a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building in cludes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Robert Pinto, Chairperson
Ewiaapaayp Tribe
4054 Willow Rd.
Alpine, CA 91901
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Pinto,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed pro ject site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson
Ewiiaapaayp Tribe
4054 Willows Road
Alpine, CA 91901
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Garcia,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently locat ed adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Virgil Perez, Chairperson
Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
P.O. Box 130
Santa Ysabel, CA 92070
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Perez,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Rebecca Osuna, Chairperson
Inaja-Cosmit Band of Indians
2005 S. Escondido Blvd.
Escondido, CA 92025
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Osuna,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in th e City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed projec t site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Clint Linton, Director of Cultural Resources
Ipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
P.O. Box 507
Santa Ysabel, CA 92070
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Linton,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed pro ject site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Lisa Cumper, THPO
Jamul Indian Village
P.O. Box 612
Jamul, CA 91935
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Cumper,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., cu rrently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Erica Pinto, Chairperson
Jamul Indian Village
P.O. Box 612
Jamul, CA 91935
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Pinto,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Carmen Lucas,
Kwaaymii Laguna Band of Mission Indians
P.O. Box 775
Pine Valley, CA 91962
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Lucas,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Norma Contreras, Chairperson
La Jolla Band of Mission Indians
22000 Highway 76
Pauma Valley, CA 92061
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Contreras,
The proposed Hughes Circuits Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., curren tly located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Gwendolyn Parada, Chairperson
La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
8 Crestwood Rd.
Boulevard, CA 91905
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Parada,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Javaughn Miller, Tribal Administrator
La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
8 Crestwood Rd.
Boulevard, CA 91905
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Miller,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Angela Elliott Santos, Chairperson
Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation
P.O. Box 1302
Boulevard, CA 91905
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Santos,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the propose d project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Michael Linton, Chairperson
Mesa Grande Band of Dieguneo Mission Indians
P.O. Box 270
Santa Ysabel, CA 92070
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Linton,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Pala Band of Mission Indians
35008 Pala Temecula Rd.
Pala, CA 92059
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Gaughen,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansi on of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Temet Aguilar, Chairperson
Pauma & Yuima Reservation
P.O. Box 369
Pauma Valley, CA 92061
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Aguilar,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources Manager
Pechanga Band of Mission Indians
P.O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA 92593
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Macarro,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the p roposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Mark Macarro, Chairperson
Pechanga Band of Mission Indians
P.O. Box 1477
Temecula, CA 92593
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Macarro,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circu its Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians
1 Government Center Lane
Valley Center, CA 92082
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Mazzetti,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Rincon Band of Mission Indians
One Governement Center Lane
Valley Center, CA 92082
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Madrigal,
The proposed Hughes Circuits Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., curren tly located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Cultural Department ,
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
1889 Sunset Dr.
Vista, CA 92081
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear ,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the deve lopment of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot bu ilding includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Tribal Council ,
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
1889 Sunset Dr.
Vista, CA 92081
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear ,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circu its Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. John Flores, Environmental Coordinator
San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
P.O. Box 365
Valley Center, CA 92082
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Flores,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Allen E. Lawson, Chairperson
San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
P.O. Box 365
Valley Center, CA 92082
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Lawson,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed pro ject site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA 92581
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Ontiveros,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street . The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
P.O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA 92581
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Vivanco,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed pro ject site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Ms. Charlene Worrell-Elliott
Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation
1 Kwaaypaay Court
El Cajon, CA 92019
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Ms. Charlene Worrell-Elliott,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Paci fic Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Cody Martinez, Chairperson
Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation
1 Kwaaypaay Court
El Cajon, CA 92019
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Martinez,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing ope rations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. John Christman, Chairperson
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians
1 Viejas Grade Rd.
Alpine, CA 91901
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Christman,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the developm ent of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed project site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot buildi ng includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
March 24, 2022 13383
Mr. Ernest Pingleton, Tribal Historic Officer
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians
1 Viejas Grade Rd.
Alpine, CA 91901
Subject: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Pingleton,
The proposed Hughes Circuit s Expansion Project is located in the City of San Marcos, California. The proposed project consists of the development of a 67,410 square foot manufacturing building to support the expansion of the existing operations of Hughes Circuits Inc., currently located adjacent to the proposed pro ject site to the south, at 546 South Pacific Street. The 67,410 square foot building includes a 56,310 square foot manufacturing/warehouse space on the first floor, a 11,100 square foot office on the mezzanine, and 72 parking spaces. Stormwater basins and associated landscaping would be incorporated along the perimeter of the proposed manufacturing building. The project site falls within Section 16 of Township 12 South, Range 3 West of the San Marcos, California 7.5-minute Quadrangle.
The Native American Heritage Commission conducted a Sacred Lands file search. The results were negative. I am writing as part of the cultural inventory process in order find out if you, or your tribal community, have any knowledge of cultural resources or places that may be impacted by the proposed project. This letter does not constitute formal government to government consultation pursuant to Assembly Bill 52.
If you have any information or concerns pertaining to such information, please contact me.
Respectfully,
_____________________
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
Phone: (619) 949-3082
Email: [email protected]
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians
CULTURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
One Government Center Lane | Valley Center | CA 92082 (760) 749-1092 | Fax: (760) 749-8901 | rincon-nsn.gov
Bo Mazzetti
Chairman
Tishmall Turner
Vice Chair
Laurie E. Gonzalez
Council Member
John Constantino
Council Member
Joseph Linton
Council Member
April 25, 2022
Sent via email: [email protected]
Ms. Keshia Montifolca
DUDEK
Main Office
605 Third Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
Re: Information Request for the Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, City of San Marcos, San Diego County, California
Dear Ms. Montifolca,
This letter is written on behalf of the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians (“Rincon Band” or “ Tribe”), a federally recognized Indian Tribe and sovereign government. We have received your notification regarding the above referenced project and we thank you for the opportunity to provide information pertaining to cultural resources. The identified location is within the Territory of the Luiseño people, and is also within Rincon Band’s specific Area of Historic Interest (AHI).
After review of the provided documents and our internal information, the Tribe understands that the project site has been disturbed by previous development. However, the project is located within a culturally-sensitive area and we believe the potential exists the project may impact tangible Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), Traditional Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), and potential Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). The Rinco n Band recommends conducting a cultural resources study, to include an archeological record search and research to identify potential historic properties. We ask that a copy of the survey will be provided to the Rincon Band for review and comment.
If you have additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact our office at your convenience at (760) 749 1092 ext. 323 or via electronic mail at [email protected]. We look forward to working together to protect and preserve our cultural assets.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Madrigal
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cultural Resources Manager
SLR Response to Cultural Resource Information Inquiry - Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, San Marcos SAN LUIS REY BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 1889 Sunset Drive • Vista, California 92081 760-724-8505 • FAX 760-724-2172 www.slrmissionindians.org April 26, 2022 Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA Archaeologist VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Dudek [email protected] RE: SLR RESPONSE REGARDING THE PROPOSED HUGHES CIRCUITS EXPANSION PROJECT IN SAN MARCOS, CA AND ITS POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Dear Ms. Montifolca: We, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (“Tribe”) have received and reviewed your letter dated March 23, 2022 (and inclusive maps) regarding the proposed Hughes Circuits Expansion Project in San Marcos, CA (“Project” and “Project Area”). We further understand from your letter that you are inquiring whether the Tribe possesses any information and/or concerns regarding tribal cultural resources and/or Sacred Lands in the Project Area. We are a northern San Diego County Tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with Camp Pendleton, the current cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Vista, San Marcos and Escondido, as well as many unincorporated areas within northern San Diego County, such as the communities of Fallbrook, Bonsall and Valley Center. We are resolute in the preservation and protection of tribal cultural resources within all these jurisdictions. Our Tribe has intimate knowledge about the many discoveries made throughout the Project Area and is aware of cultural resource sites within close proximity to the proposed Project. We strongly urge caution in assessing the land encompassing the Project for any ground disturbing purposes, as well as incorporating the presence of a Luiseño Native American monitor during all ground disturbing activities (including but not limited to any and all boring activities) and cultural resource assessment surveys. In regards to information our Tribe can provide Dudek regarding these tribal cultural resources and sacred sites within the Project Area, we respectfully request that any further discussion be done in person. Please contact our Cultural Resource Manager Cami Mojado at (760) 917-1736 or via email at [email protected] to arrange a mutually acceptable meeting date and time. Furthermore, the Tribe requests that any and all cultural resource surveys completed in the Project Area and/or for the benefit of this Project be provided to the Tribe’s Cultural Department at 1889 Sunset Drive, Vista, CA 92081 as your earliest convenience. If digital copies SLR Response to Cultural Resource Information Inquiry - Hughes Circuits Expansion Project, San Marcos are available, please send them directly to [email protected]. If a cultural resource survey has not been completed as of today’s date, then the Tribe respectfully requests that a Luiseño Native American monitor be present during any proposed survey of the Project property. We appreciate this opportunity to provide information and/or share our concerns regarding this Project. We thank you for your assistance in protecting our invaluable Luiseño tribal cultural resources. Sincerely, Cami Mojado Cultural Resource Manager San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
TRIBAL COUNCIL
Stephen W. Cope
Chairman
Justin Quis Quis
Vice Chairman
Jenny Alto
Secretary-Treasurer
Roberta Cameron
Councilman
Melody S. Arviso
Councilman
May 5, 2022
Keshia Montifolca, M.A., RPA
Archaeologist
DUDEK
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
RE: Hughes Circuits Expansion Project of San Marcos, California
Dear Mis Montifolca,
The San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians Tribal Historic Preservation Office has received your notification of the project referenced above. This letter constitutes our response on behalf of Desiree M. Whitman THPO of the San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Indians.
We have consulted our maps and determined that the project as described is not within the boundaries of the recognized San Pasqual Indian Reservation. It is, however, within the boundaries of the territory that the tribe considers its Traditional Use Area (TUA). Furthermore, we would like to engage in consultation so that San Pasqual can have a voice in developing the measures that will be taken to protect these sites and mitigate any adverse impacts. We would appreciate being given access to any cultural resource reports that have been or will be generated during the environmental review process so we can contribute most effectively to the consultation process.
We appreciate your involvement with your initiative and look forward to working with you on future efforts. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me by telephone at 760-651-5142 or [email protected]
Sincerely,
Angelina Gutierrez
Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Deputy THPO/Monitor Supervisor San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians
CULTURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
One Government Center Lane | Valley Center | CA 92082 (760) 749-1092 | Fax: (760) 749-8901 | rincon-nsn.gov
Bo Mazzetti
Chairman
Tishmall Turner
Vice Chair
Laurie E. Gonzalez
Council Member
John Constantino
Council Member
Joseph Linton
Council Member
December 20, 2022
Sent via email: [email protected]
City of San Marcos
1 Civic Center Drive
San Marcos, CA 92069
Re: Conclusion of Consultation on the Hughes SMCC, LLC Project; SDP22-0002
Dear Mr. Farace,
This letter is written on behalf of the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians (“Rincon Band” or “Tribe”), a federally recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government. Thank you for providing the Rincon Band with the Archaeological Survey Report and project descriptions for the above referenced project. The identified location is within the Traditional Use Area of the Luiseño people and is also within Rincon’s specific area of Historic interest.
The Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) has reviewed the provided documents to identify potential impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources. We agree with the mitigation measures proposed by Dudek in the Cultural Resources assessment, which include archaeological and tribal monitoring, a monitoring report, and protocols for discovery of cultural material and human remains. Please include in the measures, that if export of soil is planned, consultation with the affiliated Tribes will have to be initiated. We have no further comments regarding this project and can conclude consultation at this time. We do request that the Rincon Band be notified of any changes in project plans. In addition, we request a copy of the final monitoring report, when available and ask that Rincon be afforded the opportunity to monitor the ground disturbances associated with this project.
If you have additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact our office at your convenience at (760) 749 1092 or via electronic mail at [email protected]. Thank you for the opportunity to protect and preserve our cultural assets.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Madrigal
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cultural Resources Manager
SAN LUIS REY BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 1889 Sunset Drive • Vista, California 92081 760-724-8505 • FAX 760-724-2172 www.slrmissionindians.org 1-12-2023 Joseph Farace Planning Manager VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL City of San Marcos 1 Civic Center Drive San Marcos, CA 92069 RE: Confidential Communication Pursuant to California Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 for the Hughes Ciruits Project – Request to Conclude Consultation Between the City of San Marcos and SLR Dear Mr.Farace, This letter is in reference to the City of San Marcos’s (“City’s”) and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (“SLR” or “Tribe’s”) continued consultation for the Hughes Circuits (“Project”). This is a confidential communication between the City and SLR and should not be shared and/or duplicated without SLR’s expressed written consent. Thank you for providing SLR with the proposed mitigation measures for tribal cultural resources CUL-MM-1 through CUL-MM-4) for the project’s environmental document. The Tribe has reviewed the mitigation measures and concurs with the City that they adequately address the Tribe’s concerns as discussed during our previous consultations and are culturally-appropriate as required by CEQA. If the aforementioned mitigation measures will be the recommended mitigation measures for tribal cultural resources for this Project, then the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians respectfully requests to conclude consultation pursuant to AB 52. If, however, the aforementioned mitigation measures will not be recommended by the City in their entirety to the City’s decision-making body, then please immediately contact me at 760.917-1736 for a continued consultation meeting. Sincerely, Cami Mojado Cultural Resources Manager San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians