Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRAFT Tribal Cultural ResourcesTribal Cultural Resources Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES — a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ☐☒☐☐ ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. ☐☒☐☐ Discussion Would the Project: a)Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). ii)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The SCCIC records search (Galaz, 2020) and a pedestrian survey (ESA, 2020a) did not identify potential tribal cultural resources in the Project Site. The NAHC SLF search returned positive results (Quinn, 2020). The letter did not provide details on the resources identified, but suggested contacting the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The NAHC also provided a list of other Native American tribes to contact as they may have knowledge of cultural resources within the Project Site. The City conducted consultation with California Native American tribes pursuant to AB 52 to identify tribal cultural resources in or near the Project Site. On September 22, the City sent notification letters via certified mail with return receipted requested and email to the designated representatives of eight California Native American tribes (Table XVIII-1). The letters provide brief descriptions of the Project and its location, with maps, the lead agency’s contact information, and a notification that the tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. One request for consultation was received. In a letter dated September 23, 2020, Chairman Salas of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation requested consultation. The City meet with representatives of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation on December 9, 2020. The tribe indicated that numerous artifacts have been found in Chino Hills, which is why the sacred lands file search for the Project Site was positive. The tribe also indicated that the Project Site is located within a tribal corridor adjacent to a water source that supported natural resources and trade routes. The tribe indicated that burials or cremated remains could be present along trade routes since individuals were buried where they died. The tribe indicated that areas of high human activity would likely contain cultural materials, which could be deeply buried due to sedimentation from water flow. The tribe indicated that they would provide historic maps and review the cultural resources mitigation measures, and let the City know if they had additional measures. On December 11, 2020, the tribe provided the City with historic maps (dated 1881, 1898, 1901, 1920, and 1938), articles discussing village sites, and their tribal cultural resources mitigation measures. The maps dated 1881, 1898, and 1901 depict the Project Site as located within Rancho Rincon de la Brea (the 1881 map has a typographical error and calls it Rancho Rincon de la Grea); however, none of these maps provide information on resources within the Project Site or immediate vicinity to the Project Site. The 1920 map still exhibits the Project Site within Rancho Rincon de la Brea, but also shows Rodeo Canyon (trade route per information provided during the consultation call) as located in close proximity and west of the Project Site. The 1938 map depicts villages to the north, west, and southwest of the Project Site; however, none are depicted within the Project Site, or in the Diamond Bar area as suggested during the consultation call. Additionally, the articles provided only discuss general information on where villages would have been located (such as in close proximity to water sources), discuss how Rancherías would have had about 500 to 1500 huts, and indicate that the village of Wapijangna (mentioned in the consultation call) was once located in the town of Chino/Rancho del Chino, which is located outside of the Project Site. As such, the historic maps and articles did not provide information that indicates a tribal cultural resource is located within the Project Site. Lastly, the mitigation measures provided by the tribe include the retention of a Native American monitor during ground disturbing activities, steps to follow if human remains and associated funerary objects are encountered, and procedures to follow for burials and funerary remains. TABLE XVIII-1 SUMMARY OF AB 52 CONSULTATION Tribe Contact/Title Date Letter Sent Response Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation Andrew Salas, Chairperson 9/22/2020 In a letter dated 9/23/2020, Chairman Salas requested consultation. Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Robert Dorame, Chairperson 9/22/2020 No response Gabrielino Tongva Nation Sandonne Goad, Chairperson 9/22/2020 No response Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe Charles Alvarez 9/22/2020 No response San Fernando Band of Mission Indians Donna Yocum, Chairperson 9/22/2020 No response San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Anthony Morales, Chief 9/22/2020 No response Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Director 9/22/2020 No response Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians – Pauma & Yuima Reservation Temet Aguilar, Chairperson 9/22/2020 No response While the Project Site is sensitive for the presence of buried prehistoric archaeological resources, no known tribal cultural resources were identified in the Project Site. However, based on the information provided by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation, potential impacts to unknown resources could be significant. Mitigation Measures Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-5 is required. Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity at the Project Site, the Applicant shall retain a Native American monitor. The Native American monitor shall be selected from a tribe that has requested that a monitor be present, and in which the Project Site is within their ancestral region of occupation. The Native American monitor shall only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground-disturbing activities are defined as activities that may include, but are not limited to, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching. The Native American monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that shall provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the Project Site are completed, or when the Native American monitor has indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the Project Site have little to no potential for impacting tribal cultural resources. Mitigation Measure TCR-2: In the event tribal cultural resources are discovered during Project construction, construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 100 feet) until the find can be assessed. All tribal cultural resources unearthed by Project activities shall be evaluated by the Native American monitor and the Qualified Archaeologist. If the tribal cultural resources are also historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the affected tribe, City, and Qualified Archaeologist will confer on the final disposition of the resource(s), which may include onsite reburial, curation at a public, non- profit institution, or donation to the affected tribe. If the tribal cultural resources are not also historical resources or unique archaeological resources, the affected tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the tribe deems appropriate, for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. Work may continue in other parts of the Project Site while evaluation and any required recovery activities take place. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Significance Determination After Mitigation With implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 and TCR-2, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant. In addition, the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-5, presented in Section V. Cultural Resources, would reduce impacts to human remains to less than significant. References ESA. 2020a. Crooked Creek Residential Subdivision Project, City of Diamond Bar, California: Cultural Resources Assessment Report. Document prepared for City of Diamond Bar. Document prepared by Environmental Science Associates. December 2020. Galaz, Michelle. 2020. Records Search Results for the Diamond Bar Crooked Creek Residential Project. Records Search File No.: 21696.7793. September 28, 2020. Quinn, Steven. 2020. Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search Results for the Crooked Creek Project, Los Angeles County. September 29, 2020.