ATTACHMENT D.5
CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY
Cultural Resources Survey for the
Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
San Marcos, California
Project Nos. GPA25-0001, R25-0001, MFSDP25-0001, and
TSM25-0001
Prepared for
Santa Fe Flores, LP
P.O. Box 903
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
Contact: Paul Mayer
Prepared by
RECON Environmental, Inc.
3111 Camino del Rio North, Suite 600
San Diego, CA 92108
P 619.308.9333
RECON Number 10587
January 29, 2026
Nathanial Yerka, Project Archaeologist/Author
Carmen Zepeda-Herman, M.A., RPA, Principal Investigator
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
i
NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL DATA BASE INFORMATION
Author: Nathanial Yerka, Project Archaeologist
Carmen Zepeda-Herman, M.A., RPA, Principal Investigator Consulting Firm: RECON Environmental, Inc.
3111 Camino del Rio North, Suite 600
San Diego, CA 92108
Report Date: January 29, 2026
Report Title: Cultural Resources Survey for the Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project, San Marcos, California (GPA25-0001, R25-0001, MFSDP25- 0001, and TSM25-0001)
Submitted to: Mr. Paul Mayer
Prepared for: Santa Fe Flores, LP
P.O. Box 903
Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
Project Number: RECON Number 10587
USGS Quadrangle Map: 7.5-minute, San Marcos
Acres: 2.72 (net)
Keywords: Negative archaeological survey; San Marcos quadrangle RECON Environmental, Inc. (RECON) conducted a cultural resources inventory for the proposed Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project. The survey covered 2.72 acres, which includes the 2.6-acre (net) project area located at 2966, 2972, and 2982 South Santa Fe Avenue (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 217-161-18, 217-161-19, and the northern portion of 217-161-17) and 0.12 acres of off -site improvements.
The cultural resources surveys took place on March 10, 2022, and November 12, 2024, using a survey interval of approximately seven meters across the property. The RECON archaeologist was accompanied by a Luiseño representative from Saving Sacred Sites during both surveys.
No significant prehistoric or historic cultural resources were observed during the survey of the project area. No prehistoric or historic cultural resources were mapped on or immediately adjacent to the property in the record search files. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impact on known prehistoric or historic cultural resources. However, the possibility exists for buried prehistoric archaeological deposits on -site. Because of this factor, RECON recommends that all ground-disturbing activities for the project be monitored by a qualified archaeological monitor and Native American monitors representing the Luiseño community.
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... iii Summary 1
1.0 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 2
2.0 Natural Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ 2
3.0 Cultural Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 6
3.1 Paleoindian Period ............................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Archaic Period ..................................................................................................................................... 6
3.3 Late Prehistoric Period ..................................................................................................................... 7
3.4 Ethnohistory ......................................................................................................................................... 8
3.5 Spanish Period .................................................................................................................................... 9
3.6 Mexican Period ................................................................................................................................. 10
3.7 American Period ............................................................................................................................... 10
3.8 City of San Marcos ............................................................................................................................ 11
4.0 Background Research ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 11
4.1 Records Search .................................................................................................................................. 11
4.2 Native American Heritage Commission and Tribal Response ........................................... 13
5.0 Methods ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 14
6.0 Report of Findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 14
7.0 Management Considerations ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 17
8.0 Certification and Project Staff ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 21
9.0 References Cited ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 21
FIGURES
1: Regional Location ............................................................................................................................................. 3 2: Project Location on USGS Map .................................................................................................................... 4 3: Project Location on Aerial Photograph ..................................................................................................... 5 TABLES
1: Cultural Resources within One Mile of the Project .............................................................................. 12
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
PHOTOGRAPHS
1: Overview of Project Area from the Southeast Corner, Looking North ......................................... 15 2: Two Granite Boulders Checked for Cultural Manipulation, Looking North-Northeast ............ 15 3: Overview of Project Area from Northern Terrace on Eastern Boundary, Looking Southwest ..................................................................................................................................... 16 4: Overview of Manufactured Drainage Area on Northern Terrace, Looking South ..................... 16 5: Overview of Southern Terrace Showing a Portion of Off-Highway Vehicle Disturbance, Looking South .............................................................................................................................................. 18 6: Episodic Rubbish Dumping on Northern Terrace, Looking West-Northwest ............................. 18 7: Boulder Barrier East of Commercial Development, Looking North-Northeast .......................... 19 8: Overview of Recent Cut-Graded Road, Looking Northwest ............................................................. 19 9: Overview of Recent Geotechnical Testing Location ........................................................................... 20
ATTACHMENT
1: Native American Heritage Commission and Tribal Response CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT (Under Separate Cover)
1: Records Search : Historical Resources with Primary and Trinomial Designations ; Reports; Historic Addresses
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
C.E. Common Era
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
GPA General Plan Amendment
MFSDP Multi-Family Site Development Plan
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
project Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project
RECON RECON Environmental, Inc.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
Summary
RECON Environmental conduct ed a cultural resources inventory, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Register of Historical Resources for the proposed Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project (project). The survey covered the 2.6-acre (net) project area and 0.12 acres of off-site improvements for a total of 2.7 2 acres surveyed. The project area occurs on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 217-161-18, 217-161-19 (2972 and 2982 South Santa Fe Avenue) and 0.37 acres of the northern portion of APN 217-161-17 (2966 South Santa Fe Avenue).
On February 28, 2023, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND; ND22-008; State Clearinghouse Number 2022090486), approved a General Plan Amendment (GPA; GPA21-0008), approved a Multi-Family Site Development Plan (MFSDP21-0002), and on March 14, 2023 approved a Rezone ( R21-0004) for the Santa Fe Flores, LP Project (approved project). The approved project evaluated the impacts associated with a GPA to change the land use from Commercial (C) and Light Industrial (L-I) to Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) and a zone change from Commercial (C) and Light Industrial (L-I) to Multi -Family Residential (R -3-10) to allow for the construction of 50 multi-family residential townhome units, in conjunction with a Density Bonus, on a 2.23-acre site consisting of two parcels: APNs 217-161-18 and 217-161-19.
Subsequent to MND approval, the applicant modified the site plan and added 0.37 acres of APN 217-161-17. The project would require a GPA from Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) to Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) for APNs 217-161-18 and 217 -161-19, and a GPA from Commercial (C) to Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) for 0.37 acres of the northern portion of APN 217- 161-17. Additionally, the project would rezone APNs 217-161-18 and 217 -161-19 from Multi-Family Residential 3 (R-3-10) to Multi-Family Residential (R-3-6) and 0.37 acres of the northern portion of APN 217-161-17 from Commercial (C) to Multi-Family Residential (R -3-6). The project would develop 46 multi -family residential townhome units in seven buildings that would be three stories and 35 feet 4 inches in height. Vehicle parking would include 92 spaces within attached garages and 15 guest spaces. The liquor store would not be part of the project and would remain.
Project grading would include 23,300 cubic yards of cut and 3,200 cubic yards of fill , resulting in a net export of 20,100 cubic yards.
RECON requested a records search at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. The search radius was one mile. No prehistoric or historic cultural resources are recorded on or adjacent to the project area. A total of 31 cultural resources has been documented within one mile of the project bo undary, including 9 prehistoric period resources and 2 2 historic period resources. In addition, there are 19 historic addresses listed within the one-mile search radius.
The cultural resources surveys took place on March 10, 2022, and November 12, 2024, using a survey interval of approximately seven meters across the property. The RECON archaeologist was accompanied by a Luiseñ o representative from Saving Sacred Sites during both surveys . No significant prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed during the survey of the project area. The project will have no impact on known prehistoric or historic cultural resources.
However, the possibility exists for the buried prehistoric archaeological deposits to exist on -site.
Because of this factor, RECON recommends that all ground -disturbing activities for the project be monitored by a qualified archaeological monitor and Native American monitors representing the Luiseño community.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
1.0 Introduction
The Santa Fe Flores Townhomes Project (project) is located in the city of San Marcos at 2966, 2972, and 2982 South Santa Fe Avenue adjacent to Las Flores Drive on Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 217-161-18, 217-161-19, and the northern portion (0.37 acres) of 217-161-17 (Figure 1). The 2.6-acre (net) project area would require a General Plan Amendment (GPA) from Medium Density Residential 2 (MDR2) to Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) for APNs 217-161-18 and 217 -161-19, and a GPA from Commercial (C) to Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) for the northern portion of APN 217-161-17. Additionally, the project would rezone APNs 217-161 -18 and 217 -161-19 from Multi-Family Residential 3 (R -3-10) to Multi -Family Residential (R -3-6) and rezone the northern portion of APN 217-161-17 from Commercial (C) to Multi-Family Residential (R -3-6). The project would develop 46 multi- family residential townhome units in seven buildings that would be three stories in height. Vehicle parking would include 92 spaces within attached garages and 15 guest spaces. The liquor store, Gourmet Liquor, located on the southern portion of APN 217 -161-17 is not part of the project and would remain. Off-site improvements total 0.12 acres . The project would require 23,300 cubic yards of cut and 3,200 cubic yards of fill, for a net export of 20,100 cubic yards.
The project area is in an unsectioned portion of the Los Vallecitos de San Marcos land grant, of the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 -minute topographic map, San Marcos quadrangle (Figure 2; U.S. Geological Survey 1996). The project area is mostly vacant and undeveloped land with an adjacent liquor store and associated improved parking area to the southwest. It is surrounded on the west and north by industrial development, to the east by multi-family residential development, and to the south by single-family residential development (Figure 3). The area of potential effect includes the 2.6-acre (net) project area and the 0.12 acres of off -site improvements for a total of
2.72 acres.
2.0 Natural Setting
The project area dominated by disturbed habitat which includes areas that have been disturbed through frequent off-roading activity. The project area is comprised of non-native herbaceous cover mixed with non -native grasses. A smaller portion of the project area consists of urban /developed land which features landscaping that receives routine maintenance and irrigation; this area occurs along the eastern boundary of the project area and consists of ornamental vegetation. The elevation of the project area ranges between approximately 495 feet above mean sea level in the south and 550 above mean sea level to the north.
Soils within the project area consist of Diablo clay on the northern portion and Huerhuero loam on the southern portion (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1973). The Diablo clay series with 9 to 15 percent slopes occurs on strong slopes and ranges from 26 to 37 inches in depth over rock. The Huerhuero loam soil series is loam soils developed in sandy marine sediments and have slopes ranging from 2 to 9 percent. In a representative profile the surface layer is brown and pale brown, strongly acid to medium acid loam. The upper subsoil is brown moderately alkaline clay. Below this is brown mildly alkaline clay loam and sandy loam (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1973). !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Los
Penasquitos Canyon Presv
Daley Ranch
Lake Wohlford
Batiquitos Lagoon
Lake Hodges
San Vicente
Reservoir
Usmc Air
Station
Miramar
Camp Pendleton
Marine Co Base
Cleveland National
Forest
Temecula
San Diego
Encinitas
Oceanside
Poway
San Marcos
Vista
Carlsbad
Santee
Escondido
Solana
Beach
Del
Mar
Pauma and
Yuima
Reservation
Pala
Reservation
San
Pasqual
Reservation
Rincon
Reservation
Pechanga
Tribal Lands
Bonsall
Camp Pendleton
North
Camp Pendleton South
Eucalyptus
Hills
Fairbanks
Ranch
Fallbrook
Hidden
Meadows
Lake
San Marcos
Rainbow
Rancho
Santa Fe
Valley Center
R I V E R S I D E
C O U N T Y
S A N D I E G O
C O U N T Y
78 56
67 805
5 15
M:\JOBS6\10587\common_gis\PRO\standard_figures\standardfigures.aprx 10/29/2024 fmm Regional Location
FIGURE 1
0 5Miles [
Project Locationkj
kj
FIGURE 2
Project Location on USGS Map
Map Source: USGS 7.5 minute topographic map series, San Marcos quadrangle, 1996, Los Vallecitos de San Marcos Land Grant 0 2,000Feet
M:\JOBS6\10587\common_gis\PRO\standard_figures\standardfigures.aprx 07/21/2025 bma [
Project Boundary
Off-site Improvements
FIGURE 3
Project Location on Aerial Photograph
LA
S
FLORES D
R
VIA
LAVENTA
NLAS FLORES DR
NORMANSTR
ASS
ERD
S SANTA FE AVE
DE LEONE RD
0 200Feet
M:\JOBS6\10587\common_gis\PRO\standard_figures\standardfigures.aprx 12/03/2025 bma [
Project Boundary
Off-site Improvements
2024 Survey Area
2022 Survey Area
Image Source: Nearmap (flown May 2025)
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
3.0 Cultural Setting
3.1 Paleoindian Period
The Paleoindian Period in northern San Diego County is most closely associated with the San Dieguito Complex, as identified by Malcolm Rogers (1938, 1939, 1945) and Claude N. Warren (1961, 1964, 1966, 1967). The San Dieguito Complex includes the Lake Mohave sites, Death Valley I sites, and Playa I and II sites according to Warren (1967) and represents a generalized hunting tradition (Moratto 2004). The San Dieguito Complex can be found in all of San Diego County, parts of Riverside County, north through the Mohave Desert, east through western Arizona, and south into northern Baja California and northern Sonora (Rogers 1966). The San Dieguito Complex assemblage is dominated by finely made scraping and chopping tools, such as well-made scraper planes, choppers, scraping tools, crescentics, elongated bifacial knives, and leaf -shaped projectile points.
These tools were often made of fine-grained, slate-green felsite, or fine-grained basalt. Projectile points consist of Lake Mojave and Silver Lake types along with non-diagnostic leaf-shaped points.
Evidence of seed grinding technology (manos and metates) is scarce. San Dieguito sites in the desert are typically found around dry Pleistocene playas (Moratto 2004). Site locations and assemblages suggest a subsistence emphasis on lacustrine resources and big game hunting.
3.2 Archaic Period
The Archaic Period in northern San Diego County is represented by the Pauma Complex, a local manifestation of the widespread Millingstone Horizon (Wallace 1955). The Millingstone Horizon has been identified throughout coastal southern and central California and includes La Jolla Complex of the San Diego region and the Pauma Complex in the foothills of San Diego and Riverside counties.
These have very similar assemblages and are thought to be different environmental adaptations of the same culture (True 1958 ). A similar assemblage has been identified in the Cajon Pass area of Riverside County and is referred to as the Sayles Complex (Kowta 1969). This is thought to be transitional between the Pinto Complex of the Mojave Desert and the Millingstone Horizon of the coast (Kowta 1969:1).
The Pauma Complex assemblage suggests a generalized subsistence focus with an emphasis on hard seeds. This emphasis is indicated by the appearance of numerous slab and basin metates and the adoption of a mixed cobble/core-based tool assemblage composed primarily of crudely made choppers, scrapers, and cobble hammerstones.
Pauma Complex sites are typically found on terraces or ridges above a water source such as a stream.
They often do not have discernible midden development, but they may have subsurface deposits.
While they typically have numerous portable metates and manos , they lack bedrock milling, and mortars and pestles (True and Waugh 1981:101-102).
Major technological change within the Archaic Period in San Diego County appears to have been limited mainly to the introduction of large side-notched and Elko series projectile points. There seems to have been some reorientation in settlement from coastal to inland settings during the latter Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
portion of this period in northern San Diego County. This settlement shift appears to have occurred around 4,000 years ago and is thought to relate to the final phases of Holocene sea level rise and the resulting siltation of coastal lagoons. Prior to this time, the lagoons had been highly productive sources of shellfish for La Jollan people (Gallegos 1987; Warren et al. 1993).
3.3 Late Prehistoric Period
Near the coast and in the Peninsular Mountains beginning approximately 1,500 years ago, patterns began to emerge that suggest the ethnohistoric Kumeyaay. The Late Prehistoric Period is characterized by higher population densities and elaborations in social, political, and technological systems. Economic systems diversif ied and intensif ied during this period, with the continued elaboration of trade networks, the use of shell -bead currency, and the appearance of more labor-intensive but effective technological innovations. The late prehistoric archaeology of the San Diego coast and foothills is characterized by the Cuyamaca Complex. The Cuyamaca Complex is described by the presence of steatite arrow shaft straighteners, stea tite pendants, steatite comales (heating stones), Tizon Brownware pottery, ceramic figurines reminiscent of Hohokam styles, ceramic “Yuman bow pipes,” ceramic rattles, miniature pottery , various cobble-based tools (e.g., scrapers, choppers, hammerstones), bone awls, manos and metates, mortars and pestles, and Desert Side-notched (more common) and Cottonwood Series projectile points (True 1970).
Other parts of northern San Diego County are also represented by the San Luis Rey Complex (Meighan 1954; True et al. 1974). First described by Meighan (1954) and based on excavations at Pala some 16 miles north-northeast of the study area, San Luis Rey I sites are associated with bedrock milling features and often have recognizable midden soils. The artifact assemblage includes manos and metates, Cottonwood Triangular, and less frequently Desert Side-notched type projectile points, drills, bifacially flaked knives, bone awls, occasional steatite arrow shaft straighteners, and bone and shell ornaments (True and Waugh 1981:87). The Cottonwood Triangular and Desert Side-notched points are both smaller than earlier types, suggesting the introduction of bow-and-arrow technology into the region.
San Luis Rey II consists of the same assemblage with the addition of Tizon Brownware ceramics, red and black pictographs, cremation remains in urns, and historic materials such as glass beads and metal objects. True (1966) demonstrated that the San Luis Rey Complex almost certainly represents the ancestors of the Luiseño.
Meighan argued that ceramics, probably introduced into north San Diego County from the south, appeared around 1750 Common Era (C.E.) and were a product of indigenous diffusion that appeared at about the same time or slightly earlier than the Spanish arrival. In contrast, True et al. (1974) suggested that pottery may have appeared as early as 1200 to 1600 C.E. Later, Griset (1996) obtained 22 accelerator mass spectrometry dates from residue on pottery sherds , and she reviewed and recalibrated a number of oth ers. Griset found four dates earlier than 800 C.E. T he earliest pottery date in San Diego County according to Griset’s study was from Ystagua at 549 C.E. (1996:251 -253).
However, Griset’s data suggest that pottery was not common in San Diego County until about 1400 C.E. (1996:262). The earliest date for Tizon Brown ware in the San Diego region is not long after the advent of Lower Colorado Buff Ware, which was dated as early as 430 C.E. in the vicinity of Blythe (Hildebrand 2003:258-259).
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
3.4 Ethnohistory
The study area falls along the border of the Luiseño and Kumeyaay tribal territories (ASM Affiliates, Inc. 2014), which can be described as a line following Agua Hedionda Creek, extending northeasterly inland towards Lake Henshaw, north into Riverside County, and west through San Juan Capistrano to the coast (Bean and Shipek 1978). The Kumeyaay historically occupied the area south of Agua Hedionda into what is now Baja California , Mexico, and east into the Imperial Valley. Spanish explorers and missionaries noted that this geopolitical boundary was not static but rather fluid and dynamic (Luomala 1978:593). Because of this fluidity, the San Marcos area could have been inhabited by either the Luiseño or the Kumeyaay during the late Prehistoric and Ethnohistoric periods (ASM Affiliates, Inc. 2014). Work by Gallegos (Gallegos et al. 2002) and Comeau (Comeau et al. 2012) has attributed nearby archaeological resources to the Luiseño. This evidence supports Sparkman’s (1908) attribution of the area to the Luiseños.
The Luiseño are the most southwesterly of the Shoshonean or Uto -Aztecan speakers. Historically, the Luiseño social structure was the clan triblet. The triblet was composed of patrilineally related people who were politically and economically autonomous from neighboring triblets. Unlike other Takic-speaking tribes that surrounded them, the Luiseño do not appear to have been organized into exogamous moieties but may have been loosely divided into mountain -oriented groups and ocean-oriented groups (Bean and Shipek 1978). One or more clans would have resided together in a village (Oxendine 1980). A heredit ary village chief held a position that controlled economic, religious, and warfare powers (Bean and Shipek 1978). The chief had an assistant and an advisory council of shamans and ritual specialists. These positions were also hereditary, with successors being selected from the advisor’s lineage.
Luiseño settlement systems have been carefully reconstructed on the basis of extensive ethnographic and ethnohistoric research (Bean and Shipek 1978; Kroeber 1925; Sparkman 1908; Strong 1929; White 1963). A Luiseño clan controlled one, or possibly more, specified territories, called rancherias.
White (1963) suggests that the average inland rancheria had a territory of approximately 30 square miles. He suggested that the Luiseño settlement system consisted of a series of villages or rancherias located on terraces above a valley bottom watercourse (e.g., the San Luis Rey River). Villages were usually located in defensible locations in sheltered canyons or coves, or on the sides of slopes in warm thermal zones, near reliable water sources. The rancheria owned territory in a contiguous strip leading from the valley bottom to upland areas. This vertical pattern of rancheria territory facilitated gathering plant foods throughout the year. In early spring, tubers and berries first ripened along the watercourse below the rancheria. As spring turned to summer, chaparral plants near the rancheria became ripe. Later, those at a higher elevation above the rancheria ripened. In fall, people moved temporarily to higher elevations (e.g., Palomar Mountain) for the acorn harvest (White 1963).
A wide variety of plants growing in the various biotic communities between the coast and mountains were utilized by the Luiseño, including acorns, annual grasses , seeds, yucca, sage, chia, lemonade berry, manzanita, and other wild greens and fruits (Kroeber 1925) These resources become available at different times of the year, prompting moves to different campsites. In addition to plant-associated moves, trips to coastal camps to exploit marine resources such as shellfish, fish, and marine mammals would take place.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
According to most ethnographic accounts, acorns were considered the most important food source (Bean and Shipek 1978). Since acorns mature at differing rates between groves, and even within individual groves, movement from place to place would have been necessary to be able to effectively harvest the annual acorn crop. Acorns could be harvested in one of two ways, either gathered from the ground after they had fallen or knocked off the tree with long sticks. After harvesting, acorns could either be processed into meal or stored for winter. Acorns had to be dry to be stored to prevent spoilage. Acorns to be processed were first shelled, then worked lightly with a pestle, and winnowed to remove the thin seed covering. Next, acorns were pounded to a fine flower and leached to remove the tannins. After this, acorn flour was ready to be cooked.
Baskets, both coiled and twined, were used in gathering, preparation, and storage of food (Bean and Shipek 1978). Basket size and shape depended on its use. Pottery vessels were used for cooking and storage. Pottery was made using the paddle and anvil tech nique and was seldom decorated (Bean and Shipek 1978). Nets and pouches made of cordage and animal skins were used for carrying food and tools.
Animal resources used by the Luiseño included most of the mammals occurring in their territory, except for predator animals and tree squirrels (Bean and Shipek 1978). Reptiles were also avoided as a food source. Birds hunted included quail, ducks, and doves. Larger animals were hunted with bow and arrow, while smaller game was caught using nets, deadfalls, slings, and throwing sticks. Game drives were also used for hunting rabbits and deer. Coastal marine animals exploited included sea mammals, fish, crusta ceans, and mollusks (Bean and Shipek 1978). Basketry fish traps, seines, dip nets, bone, and shell hooks were used. Dugout and light balsa canoes were used for near-shore ocean fishing (Bean and Shipek 1978).
3.5 Spanish Period
The Spanish Period in Alta California (1769 –1821) represents a time of European exploration and settlement. Military and religious contingents established the San Diego Presidio and the San Diego Mission in 1769, San Carlos Borromeo (Carmel) in 1770, and San Gabriel Arcangel in 1771. The opening of the mission system created the need to link Alta California with Sonora, Mexico . Juan Bautista de Anza of Tubac was commissioned to open up a road across the Colorado Desert to San Gabriel and on to Monterey. Mission San Luis Rey de Francia, the closest mission to the project, was founded on June 13, 1798, by Padre Fermin Lasu én. Two sub-missions, San Antonio de Pala Asistencia and Las Flores Estancia, were established in the early 1800s to support Mission San Luis Rey. The project is on the western end of Los Vallecitos de San Marcos Rancho, which was run by Mission San Luis Rey for cattle grazing.
The Spanish mission system used forced Native American labor to produce goods and provide services needed for European settlement. The mission system also introduced horses, cattle, sheep, and agricultural goods and implements as well as new construction methods and architectural styles.
Also, with the arrival of the Spanish came devastating epidemics and very high death rates. According to available mission records, the worst year was 1806 when a measles epidemic spread through southern California. An estimated 33.5 percent of the Indian population along the coast died (Cook 1976:424).
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
3.6 Mexican Period
The Mexican Period (1821 –1848) retained many of the Spanish institutions and laws. While Spanish and Mexican settlement was focused on coastal Alta California, exploration of inland areas continued, often during the course of pursuing neophytes that had ru n away from the missions . In 1824, Santiago Arguello, an officer of the San Diego Presidio “discovered” San Felipe Valley, which opened the route through present day Warner Springs and Riverside and on to the San Gabriel Mission. This route, which became known as the Sonora Road, soon became the official Mexican mail route (Gudde and Bright 2004; Lawton 1976:58).
The missions were secularized in 1834 , opening vast tracts of former mission lands for private use and settlement. Los Vallecitos de San Marcos Rancho was granted to Don José Maria Alvarado in 1834 (Pourade 1969). Cattle ranching dominated the southern California economy, and the hide and tallow trade with New England merchant ships increased during the early part of the Mexican Period.
Native American communities continued to decline, particularly those close to th e coast. However, some Native Americans found jobs as vaqueros , laborers, garden ers, and housekeepers (Rolle 1998:57).
3.7 American Period
The signing of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, which signaled the end of the Mexican–American War, gave Alta California, the northern three-quarters of Arizona, New Mexico, a greatly enlarged Texas, and southern parts of Colorado, Nevada, and Utah to the United States (Rolle 1998:91). The treaty guaranteed citizenship to former Mexican citizens if they chose to stay in the new lands of the United States and it promised to respect their property. Native Americans had been granted Mexican citizenship in 1821, but the Americans never recognized their legal claims to U.S. citizenship, to property rights, or to other civil rights. In 1850, California was admitted to the Union as a free state (Phillips 1996:60-61).
On January 24, 1848, gold was discovered by John W. Marshall at Sutter’s Fort in the central Sierra Nevada foothills. Sutter and Marshall did their best to keep it a secret, but the news of the discovery was published on March 15 in the San Francisco Californian newspaper. The subsequent Gold Rush launched an immigrant tide, which engulfed many of the Spanish and Mexican cultural traditions and eliminated many remaining vestiges of Native American culture. Many Mexican ranchos were overrun by forty-niners or dissolved in land claim disputes (Rolle 1998). Native American Rancherias were supposedly recognized by the American government in the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo but not in reality.
The homestead system and the railroad encouraged American settlement in California after the Civil War, but settlement was slow in southern California. Most communities and ranches in northern San Diego and southern Riverside counties were not established until the land booms of the 1880s following completion of the Santa Fe and Southern Pacific railroads linking San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino with the East.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
3.8 City of San Marcos
By the late 1850s, part of Los Vallecitos de San Marcos had been sold to Cave Couts , who primarily used the parcels to raise livestock. The remainder of the grant, sold to Lorenzo Soto by Jose Alvarado’s widow, Lugarda Osuna, was patented by the U.S. Land Commission in 1883 (Carrol 1975:40). Major Gustavus French Merriam soon after established the first permanent European settlement in the North Twin Oaks Valley. On the 160 -acre homestead, Merriam began wine and honey production (City of San Marcos 2010).
Not long after Major Merriam’s settlement, German and Dutch immigrants began moving into the area in the early 1880s. By 1883, John H. Barham founded the first town in the area, just a few miles south of the Merriam’s settlement. Named “Barham Township,” the new town site had a post office, a blacksmith, a feed store, and a weekly newspaper by 1884 . The San Marcos Land Company purchased nearly all the San Marcos land formerly owned by the Couts family in 1887, dividing the land into planned community tracts, establishing the town of San Marcos (City of San Marcos 2010).
The arrival of the Santa Fe Railroad brought more people to the San Marcos area, but its siting outside the town forced the community to move the town center to present -day Mission Road and Pico Avenue. By the mid-1900s, dairies and poultry production became critical to the area’s economic development (City of San Marcos 2010).
San Marcos saw another period of rapid growth after 1956 when it established a water connection with the Colorado River water supply . With more water came more opportunities for small businesses. Through the 1960s, the city slowly gained new residents but by the 1970s, San Marcos became the third fastest-growing city in the state with a population of 17,479. During the 1980s, San Marcos almost doubled its population to 33,800. Growth has continued to boom in San Marcos , bringing the city’s population to 9 6,620 based on a 2024 California demographics report (Cubit Planning 2024).
4.0 Background Research
4.1 Records Search
RECON requested a records search at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University, which is a member of the California Historical Resources Information System. The search radius was one mile. No prehistoric or historic cultural resources are recorded on or adjacent to the project area. A total of 31 cultural resources has been documented within one mile of the project boundaries (Confidential Attachment 1; Table 1), including 9 prehistoric period resources and 22 historic period resources. In addition, there are 19 historic addresses listed within the one-mile search radius. A summary of the available site data appears in Table 1.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
Table 1
Cultural Resources within One Mile of the Project
Primary # Trinomial Age Site Type Recording Events
P-37-005584 CA-SDI-005584 Prehistoric Lithic scatter; Bedrock milling feature 1977 (Randy Franklin)
P-37-005633 CA-SDI-005633 Prehistoric
Lithic scatter; Ceramic
scatter; Bedrock milling
feature; Burials; Habitation
debris; Other-shell
1977 (Randy Franklin); 2002, 2007
(Delman James, Rich Bark, Brian Glenn,
Jerry Sabio, Ted Cooley, Ogden
Environmental Services, Inc.)
P-37-008813 CA-SDI-008813 Prehistoric Lithic scatter; Bedrock milling feature 1981 (Linda Roth)
P-37-008814 CA-SDI-008814 Historic Trash scatter; Other-burned residence 1981 (Linda Roth)
P-37-008815 CA-SDI-008815 Prehistoric Lithic scatter 1981 (Linda Roth) P-37-011663 CA-SDI-011663 Prehistoric Lithic scatter 1990 (Scott Crull, Ken Smith, Palomar College)
P-37-013009 CA-SDI-013009 Prehistoric Lithic scatter; Bedrock milling feature
1993 (B. Glenn, C. Schultze, K. Collins,
Ogden Environmental Services, Inc.)
P-37-018186 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018187 Historic One-to-three-story
commercial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services)
P-37-018188 Historic One-to-three-story
commercial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services)
P-37-018189 Historic Industrial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018190 Historic Industrial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018191 Historic Industrial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018192 Historic
One-to-three-story
commercial building;
Single-family property
1999 (P.S. Preservation Services)
P-37-018193 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018194 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018195 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018196 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018197 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018198 Historic One-to-three-story
commercial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services)
P-37-018199 Historic Industrial building 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018200 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018201 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-018202 Historic Single-family property 1999 (P.S. Preservation Services) P-37-025309 CA-SDI-016787 Prehistoric Lithic scatter 2003 (Gallegos & Associates) P-37-030664 CA-SDI-019476 Prehistoric Lithic scatter
1994 (R. Carrico, D. James, and A.
Pigniolo, Ogden Environmental
Services, Inc.); 2009 (CalTrans District
11)
P-37-033557 Historic Roads; Highway
2013 (Larry Tift, ASM Affiliates, Inc.);
2015 (Kent Manchen, Matt DeCarlo,
ASM Affiliates, Inc.); 2017 (Haley
Chateene, PanGIS); 2017 (A. Foglia, K.
Keckeisen, PanGIS, Inc.); 2018 (Sarah
Stringer-Bowsher, ASM Affiliates, Inc.)
P-37-036868 Historic Dam 2016 (Lucas Piek, ASM Affiliates) P-37-036869 Historic Dam 2016 (Lucas Piek, ASM Affiliates) Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
Table 1
Cultural Resources within One Mile of the Project
Primary # Trinomial Age Site Type Recording Events
P-37-036870 Prehistoric Isolate-flake 2016 (Lucas Piek, ASM Affiliates) P-37-038298 Historic Single-family property 2019 (Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech)
Fifty-eight cultural resources studies have been conducted within one mile of the project. One cultural resource investigation appears to have included the project area: Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Widening of South Santa Fe Avenue, Vista, California, conducted in 1974.
4.2 Native American Heritage Commission and
Tribal Response
A letter was sent to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) in Sacramento on February 11, 2022, requesting a search of their Sacred Lands File. A response letter from the NAHC was received on March 29, 2022, indicating that their Sacred Lands File search results were positive.
The NAHC also provided a list of Native American tribes who may have knowledge of cultural resources within the project APE and vicinity. During tribal consultation with the City, the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians responded on June 28, 2022, agreeing with RECON’s proposed measures found in Section 7.0. The NAHC correspondence and tribal response are in Attachment 1.
Tribal consultation was conducted again, s ubsequent to MND approval, for the modified project discussed herein. Because the project requires a GPA, the City conducted consultation in accordance with Senate Bill 18 (Government Code §65352.3), which mandates consultation with California Native American tribes for projects requiring a GPA. The City sent opportunity to consult letters on March 18, 2025. In response, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission I ndians requested consultation on April 15, 2025; the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians requested consultation on March 28, 2025; the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians requested consultation on April 23, 2025; and the Pala Band of Mission Indians requested consultation on March 24, 2025. The City sent this Cultural Resources Survey Report on November 14, 2025 to the tribes that requested consultation. As a result of consultation, the City has received a request to ensure that the City’s current mitigation measures are incorporated into the environmental document. Detailed mitigation measures can be found in Addendum No. 1 to the Final Initial Study/Environmental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Santa Fe Flores, LP Project, on file with the City. No additional consultation comments have been received.
Historic aerial photographs and topographic maps by Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC available online (at http://www.historicaerials.com) were inspected to identify any previous uses of the property. Aerial photographs from 1938, 1947, and 1953 show the project in agriculture. The 1938 and 1953 aerial photograph s exhibit the parcels in fallow agriculture where the 1947 aerial photograph shows the central portion planted possibly with trees . All three aerials support that the agriculture originates from the adjacent property to the west which is supported by the 1949 topographic map. A 1964 aerial photograph shows building development in both parcels with ancillary structures supporting the northern parcel. Both parcels now have independent entrances to their properties off of what would be present-day South Santa Fe Avenue in the south and North Las Flores Drive to the north. The buildings and supporting structures on the parcel to the north were removed between 1989 and 1990. The building on the southern parcel was removed between 2005 Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
and 2009. Also during this time, the present-day alignment for North Las Flores Drive was installed along with the generally west -facing bank of ornamental vegetation which dominates the eastern project boundary. A west-northwest by east -southeast alignment of K -Rails were added to the southern edge of the upper/ northern terrace of the northern parcel between 2016 and 2018. Also installed in the upper/ northern terrace during this time is an assumed drainage depression with stormwater manhole, culvert, and corrugated vertically placed metal pipe (Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC 2024).
5.0 Methods
A total of 2.21 acres of t he project area was surveyed by RECON archaeologist Nathanial Yerka on March 10, 2022, accompanied by Native American monitor Vi’i Sialo’i of Saving Sacred Sites.
Mr. Yerka surveyed an additional 0.37 acres of the northern portion of APN 217-161 -17 in the southwest corner of the project area on November 12, 2024, accompanied by Native American monitor John Chavez of Saving Sacred Sites. Mr. Yerka served as project archaeologist and author and Carmen Zepeda-Herman served as principal investigator. Ms. Zepeda-Herman is a member of the Register of Professional Archaeologists and meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The primary goal of this survey was to determine (1) if there are previously unrecorded cultural resources present, and if so, document the resources’ locations and what they consist of, and (2) to update conditions of previously recorded cultural resources. The project area was inspected for evidence of archaeological materials such as debris, flaked and ground stone tools, ceramics, milling features, and human remains. Photographs were taken to document the environmental setting and general conditions.
6.0 Report of Findings
The survey did not identify any prehistoric artifacts or features, or any potentially significant historic artifacts or features.
The 2022 field inspection was conducted on foot, in conditions of high clouds, strong daylight, and cool temperatures. Survey transect intervals were approximately seven meters, spaced across the property. The pro ject area is terraced into three generally flat steps with steep south-southwest-facing slopes. The entire surface of both parcels is disturbed. The southern parcel has a high amount of import gravel that links the area as a possible supporting parking area to the business adjacent to the west, with entry/exit to both the business improved parking area, as well as North Las Flores Drive (Photograph 1). Imported topping mulch is placed along a shallow berm that abuts the sidewalk of South Santa Fe Avenue and swings north east to a manufactured slope with irrigated ornamental vegetation that supports Las Flores Drive. Near the top of the first/lower terrace are two granite imported boulders (Photograph 2). Near the eastern manufactured bank is an installed concrete stormwater culvert. At the southern edge of the second/upper terrace is a west-northwest by east -southeast alignment of K -Rails (Photograph 3). Also on this terrace is a central manufactured depression that is assumed to aid for drainage with stormwater manhole, culvert, and corrugated vertically placed metal pipe (Photograph 4 ). A significant amount of rodent disturbance occurs along the western boundary; back dirt was checked for cultural material. There is current project area ground surface disturbance in the form of off-highway vehicle and bicycle
P:\10587\Arc\Photos\photos1-9.docx 07/24/25
PHOTOGRAPH 1
Overview of Project Area from the Southeast Corner, Looking North
PHOTOGRAPH 2
Two Granite Boulders Checked for Cultural Manipulation, Looking North-Northeast
P:\10587\Arc\Photos\photos1-9.docx 07/24/25
PHOTOGRAPH 3
Overview of Project Area from Northern Terrace on Eastern Boundary, Looking Southwest
PHOTOGRAPH 4
Overview of Manufactured Drainage Area on Northern Terrace, Looking South
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
activity (Photograph 5; see also Photographs 1 and 3). The project area also exhibits a fair amount of modern rubbish, mostly in the form of broken consumer bottle glass, as well as episodic dumping of furniture (Photograph 6) and dimensional lumber.
The 2024 field inspection was conducted on foot, in conditions of partly cloudy skies, strong daylight, and cool temperatures. The survey focused on the southwestern parcel, which comprises a portion of the lower two of three fully disturbed terraces and exhibits a singular commercial development with associated improved parking area adjacent to the southern boundary. The area to the east surrounding the commercial development exhibits a barrier made up of numerous placed imported boulders (Photograph 7). Several boulders were moved along the alignment of a recent cut-graded road accessing a geotechnical testing location on the middle terrace (Photographs 8 and 9). Other surface disturbances include modern rubbish, rubber tires, a high -visibility traffic barrel, and a five-gallon bucket.
7.0 Management Considerations
The key consideration for the management of cultural resources within the CEQA framework is their eligibility for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). A resource must satisfy one or more of the qualifying criteria in order to be considered eligible for listing. In order to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, a resource must satisfy at least one of the following four criteria:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. 2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. 3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. 4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Cultural and historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet one of the criteria of significance described above and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. For the purposes of eligibility for CRHR, integrity is defined as "the authenticity of an historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance" (California Office of Historic Preservation 2005:67).
No significant prehistoric or historic archaeological resources were observed during the survey of the project area. No prehistoric or historic cultural resources were mapped on or immediately adjacent to the property in the record search files. Therefore, the project will have no impact on known prehistoric or historic cultural resources. However, it appears probable that soil has been dumped on a significant portion of the parcel, obscuring the original ground. Also, the project is in an area of alluvial deposition adjacent to San Marcos Creek. Because of these factors, the possibility exists for buried prehistoric archaeological deposits on-site. RECON recommends that all
P:\10587\Arc\Photos\photos1-9.docx 07/24/25
PHOTOGRAPH 5
Overview of Southern Terrace Showing a Portion of Off-Highway Vehicle Disturbance, Looking South
PHOTOGRAPH 6
Episodic Rubbish Dumping on Northern Terrace, Looking West-Northwest
P:\10587\Arc\Photos\photos1-9.docx 07/24/25
PHOTOGRAPH 7
Boulder Barrier East of Commercial Development, Looking North-Northeast
PHOTOGRAPH 8
Overview of Recent Cut-Graded Road, Looking Northwest
P:\10587\Arc\Photos\photos1-9.docx 07/24/25
PHOTOGRAPH 9
Overview of Recent Geotechnical Testing Location
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
ground-disturbing activities for the project be monitored by a qualified archaeological monitor and a Native American monitor representing the Luiseño community. If archaeological materials are identified during construction activities, work in the immediate area shall cease and an archaeologist meeting the City’s Qualifications Standards for Archaeology must evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, a data recovery program shall be implemented. If human remains are found, construction shall halt in the immediate area and procedures set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and State health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed. After completion of monitoring, a final report with the monitoring methods and results shall be prepared and submitted to the City.
8.0 Certification and Project Staff
This report was prepared in compliance with the CEQA (Section 21083.2 of the Statutes and Appendix K of the Guidelines) and with policies and procedures of the City of San Marcos. To the best of my knowledge, the statements and information contained in this report are accurate.
_______________________________________ __________________________________________ Nathanial Yerka Carmen Zepeda-Herman, M.A., RPA
Project Archaeologist/Author Principal Investigator
The following individuals participated in the field tasks or preparation of this report.
Carmen Zepeda-Herman Principal Investigator
Nathanial Yerka Project Archaeologist/Author
Vi’i Sialo’i Luiseño Native American Monitor
John Chavez Luiseño Native American Monitor
Benjamin Arp GIS Specialist
Jennifer Gutierrez Production Specialist
Steven Gaughran Production Specialist
9.0 References Cited
ASM Affiliates, Inc.
2014 Cultural Resources Study for the Mulberry Drive Development Project, San Marcos.
Manuscript on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University.
Bean, Lowell, and Florence C. Shipek
1978 Luiseño. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
California Office of Historic Preservation
2005 Technical Assistance Series #10: California State Law and Historic Preservation: Statues, Regulations and Administrative Policies Regarding Historic Preservation and Protection of Cultural and Historical Resources. Sacramento.
Carrol, William
1975 San Marcos: A Brief History. Coda Productions, San Marcos, California.
Comeau, Brad, Micah Hale, and Mark Becker
2012 Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Palomar Station Project, San Marcos, San Diego County, California. ASM Affiliates, Inc. Manuscript on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University.
Cook, Shelburne F.
1976 The Population of the California Indians, 1769-1970. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Cubit Planning
2024 San Marcos Demographic Statistics. Accessed December 3, 2025 . https://www.california- demographics.com/san-marcos-demographics.
Gallegos, D. R.
1987 A Review and Synthesis of Environmental and Cultural Material for the Batiquitos Lagoon Region. In San Dieguito–La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy, edited by Dennis R. Gallegos.
San Diego County Archaeological Society Research Papers 1:23-34.
Gallegos, D.R., M. Guerrero, J. Flenniken, and T. Stopes 2002 Data Recovery Program for Packbell Site CA -SDI-5633, San Marcos, California . Gallegos and Associates, Carlsbad, CA. Manuscript on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University.
Griset, Suzanne
1996 Southern California Brown Ware. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.
Gudde, Erwin G., and William Bright
2004 California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names .
University of California Press, Berkeley.
Hildebrand, John
2003 Ceramics Excavated from the Lower Colorado River Region by the North Baja Pipeline Project. In A View Across the Cultural Landscape of the Lower Colorado Desert: Cultural Resource Investigations for the North Baja Pipeline Project edited by James H. Cleland and Rebecca McCorkle Apple, pp. 245 -260. Document on file with the Southeast Information Center, Imperial Valley College Desert Museum, Ocotillo, California.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
Kowta, Makoto
1969 The Sayles Complex: A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from Cajon Pass and the Ecological Implications of Its Scraper Planes. University of California Publications in Anthropology 6.
Kroeber, A. L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.
Smithsonian Institution, Washington.
Lawton, Harry W.
1976 History and Ethnohistory of the Yuha Desert (1769 -1865). In Background to Prehistory of the Yuha Desert Region, edited by Philip J. Wilke, pp. 43 -72. Ballena Press , Ramona, California.
Luomala, Katharine
1978 Tipai-Ipai. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, William G. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Meighan, Clement W.
1954 A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10:215-227.
Moratto, Michael
2004 California Archaeology. Reprint, Coyote Press, Salinas, California.
Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC
2024 Historic photographs of the survey area inspected at historicaerials.com. A ccessed on December 3, 2024.
Oxendine, Joan
1980 The Luiseno Girls Ceremony. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 2 (1) 37-50.
Phillips, George H.
1996 The Enduring Struggle: Indians in California History. MTL, Inc., Sparks, Nevada.
Pourade, Richard F.
1969 Historic Ranchos of San Diego. A Copley Book, Union-Tribune Publishing, San Diego.
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1938 Archaeological and Geological Investigations of the Culture Levels in an Old Channel of San Dieguito Valley. Carnegie Institution of Washington Yearbook 37:344-45. 1939 Early Lithic Industries of the Lower Basin of the Colorado River and Adjacent Desert Areas.
San Diego Museum of Man Papers 3.
1945 An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1(2):167-198.
Albuquerque.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West, edited by Richard F. Pourade. Union-Tribune. San Diego, California.
Rolle, Andrew
1998 California: A History. Harlan Davidson, Wheeling, Illinois.
San Marcos, City of
2010 History. Available at http://www.ci.san-marcos.ca.us/index.aspx?page=139. Accessed on January 27, 2015.
Sparkman, Philip S.
1908 The Culture of the Luiseño Indians. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 8(4):187-234.
Strong, William
1929 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California Publications in American Archeology and Ethnology 26:1-358.
True, D.L.
1958 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity 23(3):255-263. 1966 Archaeological Differentiation of Shoshonean and Yuman Speaking Groups in Southern California. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
1970 Investigation of a Late Prehistoric Complex in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San Diego County, California. Department of Anthropology Publications, University of California, Los Angeles.
True, D. L., and G. Waugh
1981 Archaeological Investigations in Northern San Diego County, California: Frey Creek. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3(1):84-115.
True, D. L., C. W. Meighan, and H. Crew
1974 Archaeological Investigations at Molpa, San Diego County, California . University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1973 Soil Survey, San Diego Area, California. Edited by Roy H. Bowman. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. December.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
1996 7.5-minute topographic map series, San Marcos Quadrangle, Los Vallecitos de San Marcos Land Grant.
Cultural Resources Survey
South Santa Fe Townhomes Project
Wallace, William J.
1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology , Vol. 11, No. 3 (Autumn, 1955), pp. 214 -230. University of New Mexico.
Warren, Claude N.
1961 The San Dieguito Complex and Its Place in California Prehistory . Archaeological Survey Annual Report (1960-1961). Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles.
1964 Cultural Change and Continuity on the San Diego Coast . Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles. 1966 The San Dieguito Type Site: M. J. Rogers 1938 Excavation on the San Dieguito River.
San Diego Museum of Man Papers 5.
1967 The San Dieguito Complex: A Review and Hypothesis . American Antiquity 32(2):168-185.
Society for American Archaeology, Salt Lake City.
Warren, Claude N., Gretchen Siegler, and Frank Dittmer
1993 Paleoindian and Early Archaic Periods in Historic Properties Background Study by Brian F.
Mooney and Associates. Document on file with the City of San Diego Clean Water Program.
White, Raymond
1963 Luiseno Social Organization. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 48(2):91-194.
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Project
ATTACHMENT 1
Native American Heritage Commission and Tribal Response
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
March 29, 2022
Carmen Zepeda-Herman
RECON Environmental, Inc.
Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Santa Fe Flores Project, San Diego County
Dear Ms. Zepeda-Herman:
A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information submitted for the above referenced project. The results were positive. Please contact the Pechanga Band of Indians on the attached list for information. Please note that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the SLF, nor are they required to do so. A SLF search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with a project’s geographic area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites, such as the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) archaeological Information Center for the presence of recorded archaeological 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. Please contact all of those listed; if they cannot supply information, they may 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 the NAHC. 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
Raymond C.
Hitchcock
Miwok/Nisenan
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
Lisa Cumper, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer
P.O. Box
612
Jamul, CA,
91935
Phone: (
619
)
669
-
4855
[email protected]
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
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
Javaughn Miller, Tribal
Administrator
8 Crestwood Road
Boulevard, CA,
91905
Phone: (
619
)
478
-
2113
Fax: (
619
)
478-2125
[email protected]
Diegueno
1 of 3
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5
of
the Health and Safety Code, Section
5097.94
of the Public 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 Santa Fe Flores Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001597
03/29/2022 01:36 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/29/2022
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
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
Mark Macarro, Chairperson
P.O. Box
1477
Temecula, CA,
92593
Phone: (
951
)
770
-
6000
Fax: (
951
)
695-1778
[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
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 Santa Fe Flores Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001597
03/29/2022 01:36 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/29/2022
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 Santa Fe Flores Project, San Diego County.
PROJ-2022-
001597
03/29/2022 01:36 PM
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Contact List
San Diego County
3/29/2022
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
June 28, 2022
Sent via email: [email protected]
Mr. Joseph Farace
City of San Marcos
1 Civic Center Drive
San Marcos, CA 92069
Re: GPA21-0008 Santa Fe/Los Flores
Dear Mr. Farace,
This letter is written on behalf of the Rincon Band of Luis eño Indians (“Rincon Band” or “Tribe ”), a federally recognized Indian tribe and sovereign government. Thank you for consulting with the Tribe on the above-mentioned project and providing us with project-related documents.
The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) has reviewed the provided documents and is in agreement with the proposed measures in the RECON Cultural Resources Assessment, which include archaeological and tribal monitoring, a monitoring report, and protocols for discovery of cultural material and human remains. We understand that other Tribes potentially have knowledge particular to this project site and may request additional measures. Please note that the Rincon Band supports all efforts to completely avoid cultural resources as preferred mitigation . 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.
The Rincon Band reserves its right to continue to fully participate in the environmental review process and to review and submit additional information during the public review process. 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]. Thank you for the opportunity to protect our cultural heritage.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Madrigal
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cultural Resources Manager
Cultural Resources Survey
Santa Fe Flores Project
CONFIDENTIAL ATTACHMENT
Not for Public Review