3.5 Cultural Resources - ACGOV.org
Transcript of 3.5 Cultural Resources - ACGOV.org
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐1
June 2014ICF 00323.08
3.5 Cultural Resources Thissectiondescribestheregulatoryandenvironmentalsettingforculturalresourcesintheprogramandprojectareas:archaeologicalmaterials,humanremains,andhistoricarchitecture,places,andartifacts.Italsodescribesimpactsonculturalresourcesthatwouldresultfromimplementationoftheprogramandthetwoindividualprojects.Mitigationmeasuresareprescribedwherefeasibleandappropriate.
3.5.1 Existing Conditions
Regulatory Setting
Federal
Archaeologicalandarchitecturalresources(buildingsandstructures)areprotectedthroughtheNationalHistoricPreservationAct(NHPA)of1966,asamended(16USC470f),anditsimplementingregulations:ProtectionofHistoricProperties(36CFRPart800),theArchaeologicalandHistoricPreservationActof1974,andtheArchaeologicalResourcesProtectionActof1979.
Priortoimplementingan“undertaking”(e.g.,issuingafederalpermit),Section106oftheNHPArequiresfederalagencies(e.g.,U.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,NationalParkService)toconsidertheeffectsoftheundertakingonhistoricpropertiesandtoaffordtheAdvisoryCouncilonHistoricPreservation(ACHP)andtheStateHistoricPreservationOfficer(SHPO)areasonableopportunitytocommentonanyundertakingthatwouldadverselyaffectpropertieseligibleforlistingontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlacesNRHP).NHPASection101(d)(6)(A)allowspropertiesoftraditionalreligiousandculturalimportancetoatribetobedeterminedeligibleforinclusionintheNationalRegister.UndertheNHPA,afindissignificantifitmeetstheNationalRegisterlistingcriteriaunder36CFR60.4,asstatedbelow.
ThequalityofsignificanceinAmericanhistory,architecture,archaeology,engineering,andcultureispresentindistricts,sites,buildings,structures,andobjectsthatpossessintegrityoflocation,design,setting,materials,workmanship,feeling,andassociationand:
a) Thatareassociatedwitheventsthathavemadeasignificantcontributiontothebroadpatternsofourhistory,or
b) Thatareassociatedwiththelivesofpersonssignificantinourpast,or
c) Thatembodythedistinctivecharacteristicsofatype,period,ormethodofconstruction,orthatrepresenttheworkofamaster,orthatpossesshighartisticvalues,orthatrepresentasignificantanddistinguishableentitywhosecomponentsmaylackindividualdistinction,or
d) Thathaveyielded,ormaybelikelytoyield,informationimportantinprehistoryorhistory.
FederalreviewofprojectsisnormallyreferredtoastheSection106process.TheSection106processnormallyinvolvesstep‐by‐stepproceduresthataredescribedindetailintheimplementingregulations(36CFRPart800)andsummarizedhere.
Establishafederalundertaking.
DelineatetheAreaofPotentialEffects.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐2
June 2014ICF 00323.08
IdentifyandevaluatehistoricpropertiesinconsultationwiththeSHPOandinterestedparties.
AssesstheeffectsoftheundertakingonpropertiesthatareeligibleforinclusionintheNationalRegister.
ConsultwiththeSHPO,otheragencies,andinterestedpartiestodevelopanagreementthataddressesthetreatmentofhistoricpropertiesandnotifytheAdvisoryCouncilonHistoricPreservation.
Proceedwiththeprojectaccordingtotheconditionsoftheagreement.
State
TheStateofCaliforniaimplementstheNHPAthroughitsstatewidecomprehensiveculturalresourcepreservationprograms.TheCaliforniaOfficeofHistoricPreservation(OHP),anofficeoftheCaliforniaDepartmentofParksandRecreation,implementsthepoliciesoftheNHPAonastatewidelevel.TheOHPalsomaintainstheCaliforniaHistoricalResourcesInventory.TheSHPOisanappointedofficialwhoimplementshistoricpreservationprogramswithintheState’sjurisdiction.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
CEQA,ascodifiedinPRCSections21000etseq.andimplementedviatheCEQAGuidelines(14CCRSection15000etseq.),istheprincipalstatutegoverningtheenvironmentalreviewofprojectsinthestate.TheCEQAGuidelinesdefineahistoricalresourceas:(1)aresourceintheCaliforniaRegisterofHistoricResources(CHRH);(2)aresourceincludedinalocalregisterofhistoricalresources,asdefinedinPRCSection5020.1(k)oridentifiedassignificantinahistoricalresourcesurveymeetingtherequirementsofPRCSection5024.1(g);or(3)anyobject,building,structure,site,area,place,record,ormanuscriptthataleadagencydeterminestobehistoricallysignificantorsignificantinthearchitectural,engineering,scientific,economic,agricultural,educational,social,political,military,orculturalannalsofCalifornia,providedtheleadagency’sdeterminationissupportedbysubstantialevidenceinlightofthewholerecord.
TheCRHRis“anauthoritativelistingandguidetobeusedbystateandlocalagencies,privategroups,andcitizensinidentifyingtheexistinghistoricalresourcesofthestateandtoindicatewhichresourcesdeservetobeprotected,totheextentprudentandfeasible,fromsubstantialadversechange(PRCSection5024.1[b]).TheCRHRcriteriaarebasedonNRHPcriteria.CertainresourcesaredeterminedbyCEQAtobeautomaticallyincludedintheCaliforniaRegister,includingCaliforniapropertiesformallyeligiblefororlistedintheNationalRegister.TobeeligiblefortheCaliforniaRegisterasahistoricalresource,aprehistoricorhistoric‐periodresourcemustbesignificantatthelocal,state,and/orfederallevelunderoneormoreofthefollowingcriteria[14CCRSection4852(b)].
(A) IsassociatedwitheventsthathavemadeasignificantcontributiontothebroadpatternsofCalifornia’shistoryandculturalheritage;
(B) Isassociatedwiththelivesofpersonsimportantinourpast;
(C) Embodiesthedistinctivecharacteristicsofatype,period,region,ormethodofconstruction,orrepresentstheworkofanimportantcreativeindividual,orpossesseshighartisticvalues;or,
(D) Hasyielded,ormaybelikelytoyield,informationimportantinprehistoryorhistory.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐3
June 2014ICF 00323.08
ForaresourcetobeeligiblefortheCRHR,itmustalsoretainenoughintegritytoberecognizableasahistoricalresourceandtoconveyitssignificance.AresourcethatdoesnotretainsufficientintegritytomeettheNRHPcriteriamaystillbeeligibleforlistingintheCaliforniaRegister.
CEQArequiresleadagenciestodetermineifaproposedprojectwouldhaveasignificanteffectonimportanthistoricalresourcesoruniquearchaeologicalresources.Ifaleadagencydeterminesthatanarchaeologicalsiteisahistoricalresource,theprovisionsofPRCSection21084.1andStateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5wouldapply.IfanarchaeologicalsitedoesnotmeettheStateCEQAGuidelinescriteriaforahistoricalresource,thenthesitemaymeetthethresholdofPRCSection21083.2regardinguniquearchaeologicalresources.Auniquearchaeologicalresourceisanarchaeologicalartifact,object,orsiteaboutwhichitcanbeclearlydemonstratedthat,withoutmerelyaddingtothecurrentbodyofknowledge,thereisahighprobabilitythatitmeetsanyofthefollowingcriteria[PRCSection21083.2(g)].
(1) Containsinformationneededtoanswerimportantscientificresearchquestionsandthatthereisademonstrablepublicinterestinthatinformation.
(2) Hasaspecialandparticularqualitysuchasbeingtheoldestofitstypeorthebestavailableexampleofitstype.
(3) Isdirectlyassociatedwithascientificallyrecognizedimportantprehistoricorhistoriceventorperson.
TheStateCEQAGuidelinesnotethatifaresourceisneitherauniquearchaeologicalresourcenorahistoricalresource,theeffectsoftheprojectonthatresourceshallnotbeconsideredasignificanteffectontheenvironment(StateCEQAGuidelinesSection15064[c][4]).
Local
TheAlamedaCountyGeneralPlanconsistsofseveraldocumentsthatdiscussspecificgeographicareasindetailinthewesternpartofthecounty,aswellasgeneralgoals,policies,andactionsforhouse,safety,conservation,openspace,noise,andrecreation.In2012,theAlamedaCountyBoardofSupervisorsadoptedahistoricpreservationordinancethatcodifiedthedefinitionandmaintenanceoftheAlamedaCountyRegisterofHistoricResources,howpropertiescanbeaddedorremovedfromthecountyregister,andwhatactivitiesmaybesubjecttoreview.Theordinancealsoprovidedincentivesforthepreservationofhistoricresources.
Environmental Setting
Prehistoric Context
TheBayAreawasaregionofintensehumanoccupationlongbeforetheEuropeanexplorerssettledintheregionintheeighteenthcentury.Intheearlytwentiethcentury,theprehistoryoftheregionwasvirtuallyunknown,asidefromasmallamountofethnographicinformation(Kroeber1925)andthediscoveryofafewprehistoricsitesatthesouthernendoftheSanFranciscoBay(Nelson1909).
Millikenetal.(2007)presenttheideathataseriesofculturechangesintheSanFranciscoBayAreatookplaceduringthe11500–8000calB.C.timeframe,suggestingthatClovisbig‐gamehunters,theninitialHolocenegatherers,livedinthearea.Presumably,however,evidencetosupportthishasbeenwashedawaybystreamaction,buriedundermorerecentalluvium,orsubmergedonthecontinentalshelf(RosenthalandMeyer2004:1).Thereisevidence,however,foranin‐placeforager
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐4
June 2014ICF 00323.08
economicpattern,beginningaround8000calB.C.,followedbyaseriesoffivecyclesofchangethatbeganatapproximately3500calB.C.,asdescribedbelow.
The Early Holocene (Lower Archaic), cal 8000 to 3500 B.C.
Betweencal8000and3500B.C.,theBayAreaappearstohavebeenoccupiedbyawidespreadbutsparsepopulationofhunter‐gatherers.Themillingslabandhandstone,aswellasavarietyoflarge,wide‐stemmedandleaf‐shapedprojectilepoints,allemergedduringthisperiod(Millikenetal.2007:114).
The Early Period (Middle Archaic), cal 3500 to 500 B.C.
SeveraltechnologicalandsocialdevelopmentscharacterizethisperiodintheBayArea.RectangularHaliotisandOlivellashellbeads,themarkersoftheEarlyPeriodbeadhorizon,continuedinuseuntilatleast2,800yearsago(Ingram1998;WallaceandLathrop1975:19).ThemortarandpestlewerefirstdocumentedintheBayAreashortlyafter4000B.C.,andby1500calB.C.,cobblemortarsandpestles,andnotmillingslabsandhandstones,wereusedatsitesthroughouttheBayArea,includingALA‐307(WestBerkeley)andALA‐483(LivermoreValley)(Wiberg1996:373).
Lower Middle Period (Initial Upper Archaic), 500 cal B.C.to cal A.D. 430)
Althoughitisunclearwhenthe“majordisruptioninsymbolicintegrationsystems”originated,itisclearintherecordaround500B.C.andmayhavebegunseveralhundredyearsearlier(Millikenetal.2007:115).AnewsuiteofdecorativeandpresumedreligiousobjectsappearedduringtheEarlyPeriod–MiddlePeriodTransition(EMT)(Elsasser1978),whichcorrespondstothebeginningofthisperiod.BeadHorizonM1oftheMiddlePeriod(UpperArchaic,200calB.C.tocalA.D.430),whichdevelopedoutoftheEMT,markedthefirstofaseriesofbeadhorizonsofcentralCaliforniabeadtradeuntilcalA.D.1000(Groza2002).
Upper Middle Period (Late Upper Archaic), cal A.D. 430 to 1050)
DuringtheUpperMiddlePeriod(LateUpperArchaic)(calAD430to1050),theOlivellasaucerbeadtradenetworkoftheLowerMiddlePeriodcollapsed.MorethanhalfoftheknownM1siteswereabandoned.Intheremainingsites,thenumberofseaotterbonesgreatlyincreased(Bennyhoff1994a,1994b).
Initial Late Period (Lower Emergent), cal A.D. 1050 to 1550
Duringthisperiod,burialobjectsbecamemuchmoreelaborate,andinitialmarkersoftheAugustinePatternappearedintheformofmulti‐perforatedandbar‐scoredHaliotisornamentsandnewOlivellabeadtypesinsitessuchasSCL‐690(Hylkema2007).ClassicAugustinePatternmarkers,whichappearedinbeadhorizonL1(aftercalAD1250),includethearrow,flangedpipe,Olivellacalluscupbead,andthebanjoeffigyornament(Bennyhoff1994c).
EvidenceforincreasedsocialstratificationthroughouttheBayAreaafterAD1250canbefoundinmortuaryevidence,suchashigher‐qualityburialitemsinhigh‐statusburialsandcremations(Fredrickson1994:62).ThismayhavereflectedanewregionalceremonialsystemthatwastheprecursoroftheethnographicKuksucult,aceremonialsystemthatunifiedthemanylanguagegroupsaroundtheBayAreaduringbeadhorizonL1(Millikenetal.2007:117).
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐5
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Terminal Late Period: Protohistoric Ambiguities
AnupwardcycleofregionalintegrationwaslikelycommencingaroundthetimeofSpanishsettlementintheBayArea.SuchregionalintegrationwasacontinuingcharacteristicoftheAugustinePattern,mostlikelybroughttotheBayAreabyPatwinspeakersfromOregon,whointroducednewtools(suchasthebow)andtraits(suchaspre‐intermentgrave‐pitburning)intocentralCalifornia.PerhapstheAugustinePattern,withitsinferredsharedregionalreligiousandceremonialorganization,wasdevelopedasameansofovercominginsularity,notinthecoreareaofonelanguagegroup,butinanareawheremanyneighboringlanguagegroupswereincontact(Millikenetal.2007:118).
Ethnography
TheprogramareaislocatedwithintheancestralterritoryoftheOhlone.Historically,theOhlonewerecalledtheCostanoanIndians.CostanoanisderivedfromtheSpanishwordcostaños,meaning“peopleofthecoast”(Levy1978:494).ThetermOhloneorCostanoandenotesalargergroupwithmanyothertribeletsthroughouttheBayArea(Levy1978:485).ThetermOhloneispreferredbythepresent‐daymembersofthegroup.
TheOhlonearebelievedtohaveinhabitedtheareasinceAD500orearlier.TheirterritoryextendedalongthecoastfromSanFranciscoBayinthenorthtojustbeyondCarmelinthesouth,andasmuchas60milesinland.
TheOhlonearealinguisticallydefinedgroup.EightdifferentbutrelatedlanguageswerespokenbytheOhlone.TheOhlonelanguages,togetherwithMiwok,comprisetheUtianlanguagefamilyofthePenutianstock(Levy1978:485‐486).
TheprogramareaiswithintheterritoriesoftheLuechaandSsaoamtribeletsofOhlone.MillikenplacedtheLuechasonCorralHollowandArroyoMochointhe“roughlandssoutheastoftheLivermoreValley”(Milliken1995:247).However,theymayhaveprimarilydwelledfarthereast,alongtheSanJoaquinRiver(Schenck1926:133).TheSsaoamtribelivedinthedryhillsandtinyvalleysaroundBushyPeakandAltamontPass,hilllandswhichseparatedtheLivermoreValleyfromtheSanJoaquinValley(Milliken1995:255).
TheOhlonewerehunter‐gatherersandreliedonacornsandseafood;however,theyalsoexploitedmanyotherfoods,includingvariousseeds(growthwaspromotedbycontrolledburning),berries,roots,landandseamammals,reptiles,andinsects(Levy1978:491‐493).
Aboriginally,theOhlonewerepoliticallyorganizedbytribelet,eachhavingadesignatedterritory.Atribeletcomprisedoneormorevillagesandcampswithinaterritoryoftendesignatedbygeographicfeatures.Tribeletsgenerallyhad100to250members(Kroeber1925).Theofficeoftribeletchiefwasinheritedpatrilineallyandcouldbeoccupiedbyamanorwoman.Dutiesofthechiefincludeddirectingceremonialactivitiesandservingtheleaderofacouncilofelders,whichfunctionedprimarilyinanadvisorycapacitytothecommunity(Levy1978:487).
SevenSpanishmissionswerefoundedinOhloneterritorybetween1777and1797.Missionlife,forthemostpart,wasdevastatingtotheOhlonepopulation.Asaresultofintroduceddiseasesandadecliningbirthrate,theOhlonepopulationfellfrom10,000ormorein1770tolessthan2,000in1832(Cook1943a,1943b;Levy1978:486).AfterthemissionsweresecularizedbytheMexicangovernment(around1830),manyNativeAmericans,includingOhlones,leftthemissionsinanattempttoreestablishtheirpreviouslives.ManyOhlonefoundworkaswagelaborersonthe
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐6
June 2014ICF 00323.08
ranchosandminesorindomesticpositions.Therewasapartialreturntoaboriginalreligiouspracticesandsubsistencestrategies,butforthemostpart,theOhloneculturewasgreatlydiminished(Levy1978:486‐487).Today,descendantsoftheOhlonestillliveinthearea,andmanyareactiveinmaintainingtheirtraditionsandadvocatingNativeAmericanissues.
3.5.2 Environmental Impacts
Methods for Analysis
Records Search
AculturalresourcesrecordssearchwasconductedattheCaliforniaHistoricalResourcesInformationSystem(CHRIS)NorthwestInformationCenter(NWIC),SonomaStateUniversity,RohnertPark,inJune2013.Therecordssearchencompassedtheprogramarea(inwhichtheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojectareasarecontained)anda1/8‐milesearchradiusaroundtheprogramarea.
TherecordssearchincludedreviewsoftheNWICdatabasesofarchaeologicalsitesandreports;theNationalRegisterandtheDirectoryofArchaeologicalDeterminationsofEligibilityforCaliforniathroughJune2013;theCaliforniaRegister,CaliforniaHistoricalLandmarks,andPointsofHistoricalInterest;theCaliforniaInventoryofHistoricResources;andtheHistoricPropertyDateFilesforAlamedaCountythrough2013.TheNWICrecordssearchalsoincludedreviewoftheGeneralLandOffice(GLO)1862CanadadeLosVaquerosplatmap;andthe1862and1867platsofTownship2South,Range3East.NoneoftheGLOplatscontainedanyculturalinformationwithintheprogramarea.
Recordssearchresultsfortheprogramareaandtheindividualprojectareas—PattersonPassandGoldenHills—arediscussedbelow.Theprojectareasaremuchsmallerthantheprogramareaandcontainfewerresourcesandhavehadfewerstudiesthantheprogramarea.
Program Area
TheNWICrecordssearchidentified90culturalresourceswithintheprogramarea.Ofthose90resources,9areprehistoric,1ismulti‐component(asitewithbothhistoricarchaeologicalandprehistoriccomponents),andtheremainingsitesarehistoric‐periodsites:55historicarchaeological(including4isolates),19historicarchitectural,and6siteswithbothhistoricarchaeologicalandarchitecturalcomponents.
Becauseofthelargeamountofresourcesidentifiedwithintheprogramarea,alloftheseresourceswillnotbepresentedhere.However,thedifferenttypesofresourceswillbebrieflydiscussed.
Theprehistoricresourceswithintheprogramareaincludetworockshelters,threebedrockmortarsites,aseasonaloccupationsite,andascatterofmillingslabfragmentsandabowlmortar.Themulti‐componentsiteisP‐01‐011054,theTeslaComplex.Thiscomplexconsistsoftwoprehistoricfeaturesandsevenlociofhistoric‐periodminingandresidentialfeatures(NewlandandErickson2010).NoneoftheseresourceshavebeenevaluatedforNRHPorCRHReligibility.
TheBrushyPeakArchaeologicalDistrict(P‐01‐011111)isadjacenttotheprogramarea.ThisdistrictislocatedattheBrushyPeakRegionalPreserveintheEastBayRegionalParkDistrict(EBRPD),anditsboundariescorrespondtothoseofthepropertylineofEBRPD(FentressandGuerrero2010),
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐7
June 2014ICF 00323.08
whichissurroundedonthreesidesbytheprogramarea.ItconsistsofaNativeAmericanvillageandbedrockmortarcomplexes.Thedistrictalsoincludesfourdistinctlocicontainingvariousbedrockmortarsand/orlithicscatters.Oneoftheseloci,Locus1,isapreviouslyrecordedsite,CA‐ALA‐622.CA‐ALA‐622consistsofavarietyofbedrockmortarsandlithicscattersinfourdistinctareas.Inthedistrictform,P‐01‐011111hasaNRHPstatusof3S.However,thedistrictisnotyetlistedintheNRHP.
Historicresourceswithintheprogramareaincludeavarietyofhistoric‐eraarchaeologicalsitesandisolates,structuresandobjects,andsitescomprisedofbotharchaeologicalandarchitecturalcomponents.
Thehistoric‐eraarchaeologicalresourcesincluderesourcesassociatingwithmining(mineadits,shafts,portals,wasterockpiles,depressions,andprospectingscrapes);housesites(includingfoundations);artifactscatters(consistingofglassandceramicfragments;constructionandbuildingdebris;partoffarmmachinery/equipment,andcansandothermetalitems);isolatedglassandfencepostfragments;formerreservoirorpondsites;remnantsofcorralsandwindmills;pipeframes;formerminingtownsites(Harrietville,Harrisville);drainagesandoverflowchannels;historicroads(theTesla‐LivermoreRoad,theWestMitchellRavineRoad,andtheMitchellRavineRoad);ahistoric‐eraprivatefamilycemetery(withgravelandtelephonepolesplacedhorizontallyaroundtheperimetertoprotectthearea);andtheleveledfieldfromtheOldTeslabaseballfield.
Thehistoricarchitecturalresourcesincludetransmissionlines,canals,extantresidentialstructuresandranchingcomplexes,theSouthern(Union)PacificRailroad,bridges,corrals/troughs,andaculvert.Thoseresourcesthatcontainbothhistoric‐eraarchaeologicalandarchitecturalcomponentsarecomprisedofformerranchcomplexesandhomesteadsiteswithextantbuildingsandstructures,collapsedstructures,foundations,andartifactscatters.
Table3.5‐1presentstheresourceswithintheprogramareathathavebeenconsideredforNRHPorCRHReligibilityandtheirstatus,ifapplicable.
TheNWICrecordsindicatedthatabout130studieshavebeenconductedwithinoradjacenttotheprogramareaandthatapproximately75%oftheprogramareahasbeenstudied.Becauseoftheextensivenumberofstudiesthathavebeenconductedwithintheprogramarea,theywillnotbediscussedindetailinthisdocument.However,itwillbenotedthatportionsoftheprogramareahavebeenextensivelystudied,throughavarietyofsurveyreports.Manyofthestudiesconductedinthe1980swereforvariousphasesandlocationsofthecurrentwindfarmswithintheprogramarea.Additionalstudieswithintheprogramareaincludestudiesforlandfillsitesandassociatedfacilities,pipelinesandtransmissionlines,propertyevaluations,bridgeassessments,cellulartowerstudies,waterconveyancedevelopmentandimprovement,roadimprovements,studiesfortheBrushyPeakRegionalPreserve,andavarietyofoverviewstudiescoveringhistoric,ethnographic,andgeoarchaeologicaltopicsinAlamedaCountyandbeyond.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐8
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Table 3.5‐1. Resources within the Program Area Considered for NRHP/CRHR Eligibility
ResourceNumber SitePeriod SiteType Description Location
NRHP/CRHREligibility
P‐01‐010447/CA‐ALA‐596
HistoricArchitectural
Historic–Transmissionline
SegmentoftheTracy‐ContraCosta‐YgnacioTransmissionline;constructedin1951
Withinprogramarea
NRHPstatuscode6Z
P‐01‐010448/CA‐ALA‐587
HistoricArchitectural
Historic–Transmissionline
SegmentoftheTracy‐LosVaquerosTransmissionLine;constructedin1951
Withinprogramarea
NRHPstatuscode6Z
P‐01‐010501 HistoricArchitectural
Historic–Raillinesegment
SegmentoftheSouthern(Central)PacificRailroadGradewhereitcrossesMidwayRoad;100feetlong;centeredonMidwayRoad;tracksandtieshavebeenremoved;however,thegradeisinexcellentconditionandretainsitsballastrock
Withinprogramarea
TheCPRRmaymeetCRHRCriteria1and3,butithasnotbeenformallyevaluated
P‐01‐010504 HistoricArchaeologicalandArchitectural
Historic–Windmillandfarmfeatures
Waterpumpingwindmill,withanassociatedabandonedtruck,collapsedwatertank,concretetrough,andacattlecorral
Withinprogramarea
RecommendednoteligibleforNRHPorCRHR
P‐01‐010613 HistoricArchaeologicalandArchitectural
Historic–Road
SegmentofGrantLineRoad‐paved,2lanes,approximately30feetwide;routewasplacedasearlyas1874;theRoadrunsalongtherouteoftheoriginalLincolnHighway(thefirstpavedtranscontinentalroad)
Withinprogramarea
AppearstomeetCRHRCriterion1buthasnotbeenformallyevaluated
P‐01‐010947 HistoricArchitectural
Historic–Transmissionline
Pittsburg‐Tesla230kVtransmissionline,approximately31mileslongandorientednorthwesttosoutheast;constructedbyPG&Ein1959–1960
Withinprogramarea
RecommendednoteligibleforNRHPorCRHR
P‐01‐011111 PrehistoricandHistoric
Prehistoric–ArchaeologicalDistrict
BrushyPeakArchaeologicalDistrict:aprehistorichabitationsitewithbedrockmortarcomplexes;fourhumanburialswereexposedduringwetlandspondconstructionin2006;obsidianprojectilepoint,chertflakestonetoolsanddebitage,groundstonetools,andfire‐affectedrockwereobserved
Adjacenttoprogramarea
NRHPstatuscode3S
P‐01‐011114 Prehistoric Prehistoric–Outcrop
24+bedrockmortarsandacupulearelocatedonsandstoneoutcropsandboulders;sandstoneformationsarelocatedinopengrassland
WithinP‐01‐11111,whichisadjacenttotheprogramarea
WithintheBrushyPeakArchaeologicalDistrict(NRHPstatuscode3S)
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐9
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Golden Hills Project Area
ThreeresourceswereidentifiedbytheNWICasbeingintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Allthreearehistoric‐eraresources.
P‐01‐000163/CA‐ALA‐441H:ahistoric‐eraranchcomplexconsistingof5separatefeatures(2streamripraps,onestreamriprap/possiblecheckdam,onepossiblecheckdam,andfootingsfortwostructureswithpossibledrainageditchesandasparsescatterofceramicandglassfragmentsandmetal/constructiondebris.
P‐01‐000177/CA‐ALA‐455H:theSantucciPropertyHomestead,ahistoric‐eraranchcomplexwithstandingbuildings(barns,shed,rootcellar,cattlefeedingareas);corrals,fences,foundations,collapsedstructure;variousconstructionanddomesticdebris.
P‐01‐010957:theremnantsofanabandonedcorral.
NoneoftheseresourceshasbeenevaluatedforNRHP/CRHReligibility.
Twenty‐threestudieshavebeenconductedwithinoradjacenttoportionsoftheGoldenHillsprojectarea.About75%ofthisprojectareahasbeenstudied.
S‐121,Fredrickson,D.andP.Banks.1975.AnArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheProposedAltamontLandfillSite.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐2623,Holman,M.1981.ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheWindpowerGeneratorFarmtobeLocatedontheJessRanchEastofLivermore,AlamedaCounty(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐2865,Holman,M.1982.ArchaeologicalFieldReconnaissanceoftheWindFarmPlannedfortheLandsofMulqueeneyandHerainAlamedaCounty(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐5657,Slater,S.andM.Holman.1982.AnArchaeologicalReconnaissanceofSixWindfarmParcelsnearAltamontPass,AlamedaCounty.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐5659,Holman,M.1982.AnArchaeologicalFieldReconnaissanceofPropertiesBeingConsideredforWindfarmDevelopment(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐5862,Holman,M.1982.AnArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheProposedFayetteManufacturingCompanyWindFarmontheMorgan,Shuff,Haera,andCostelloProperties,AltamontPass,AlamedaCounty,California.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐5868,Holman,P.1983.AFieldArchaeologicalReconnaissanceofaProposedWindFarmfortheFieldsRanch,AltamontPass,AlamedaCounty(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐6007,Fredrickson,D.1983.ArchaeologicalSurveyoftheWindEnergyCompanyProjectAreanearAltamontPass,AlamedaCounty,California.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐10
June 2014ICF 00323.08
S‐6125,Holman,M.1983.AnArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheRalphPropertiesWindfarmProjectArea,AltamontPass,AlamedaCounty,CA.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐6489,Clark,M.1984.ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheGomesNorthParcel,AlamedaCounty,CA.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐7075,Holman,M.1984.SantucciPropertyArchaeologicalReconnaissance(letterreport).P‐01‐000177/CA‐ALA‐455Hwasidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐8942,Ruckle,J.1974.ArchaeologyoftheCaliforniaStateWaterProject.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐9119,Killam,W.1987.CulturalResourcesInvestigationsandIntensiveSurveyfortheLawrenceLivermoreDirectService230‐kVTransmissionLine.P‐01‐000163/CA‐ALA‐441Hwasidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐9995,Killam,W.1988.CulturalResourcesInvestigationsfortheTracy‐BanksTransmissionLine,AlamedaCounty,CA.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐11396,BioSystemsAnalysis,Inc.1989.TechnicalReportofCulturalResourcesStudiesfortheProposedWTG‐WEST,Inc.,LosAngelestoSanFranciscoandSacramento,CA:FiberOpticsProject.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐17993,Hatoff,B.B.Voss,S.Waechter,S.Wee,andV.Bente.1995.CulturalResourcesInventoryReportfortheProposedMojaveNorthwardExpansionProject.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐18762,Archeo‐Tec.1989.CulturalResourcesEvaluationoftheProposedMountainHousePlannedCommunity,AlamedaandSanJoaquinCounties,CA.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐27973,Dice,M.2003.RecordsSearchandSiteVisitforSprintTelecommunicationsFacilityCandidateSF58XC002A(AltamontPass),11830SouthHighway580East,Livermore,AlamedaCounty(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐29359,Pastron,A.andR.Brown.1998.HistoricalCulturalResourceAssessment,ExistingTelecommunicationsFacility,I‐580‐C,SiteNo.PL‐110‐03,11701N.FlynnRoad,Livermore(letterreport).NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐32791,Psota,S.,M.Newland,andA.Praetzellis.2000.AttachmentA,SiteDescriptionandPhotographs,PL‐113‐02Monopole,11700N.FlynnRoad,Livermore,CA.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐35187,Schmid,T.2008.ArchaeologicalSurveyReport,CliftonCourtForebayDeltaMaintenanceProject.NoresourcesintheGoldenHillsprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐35796,Siskin,B.,C.DeBaker,andJ.Lang.2009.CulturalResourcesInvestigationsandArchitectureofthePittsburg‐TeslaTransmissionLine,ContraCostaandAlamedaCounties,CA.P‐01‐000957wasrecordedduringthisstudy.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐11
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Patterson Pass Project Area
NoresourceswereidentifiedbytheNWICasbeinginthePattersonPassprojectarea.
FivestudieshavebeenconductedwithinoradjacenttoportionsofthePattersonPassprojectarea.Thisentireprojectareahasbeenstudied.
S‐5868,Holman,M.1983.AFieldArchaeologicalReconnaissanceofaProposedWindFarmfortheFieldsRanch,AltamontPass,AlamedaCounty,California(letterreport).NoresourcesinthePattersonPassprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐6133,Holman,M.1983.FieldArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheProposedSweetPropertyWindFarm(letterreport).NoresourcesinthePattersonPassprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐6490,Clark,M.1983.ArchaeologicalReconnaissanceoftheMoyProperty,AlamedaCounty,California.NoresourcesinthePattersonPassprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐11396,BioSystemsAnalysis,Inc.1989.TechnicalReportofCulturalResourcesStudiesfortheProposedWTG‐WEST,Inc.,LosAngelestoSanFranciscoandSacramento,California:FiberOpticCableProject.NoresourcesinthePattersonPassprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
S‐17993,Hatoff,B.B.Voss,S.Waechter,S.Wee,andV.Bente.1995.CulturalResourcesInventoryReportfortheProposedMojaveNorthwardExpansionProject.NoresourcesinthePattersonPassprojectareawereidentifiedduringthisstudy.
Field Survey
AculturalresourcesfieldsurveyisinprocesstocoverthoseportionsoftheGoldenHillsprojectareathatwerenotpreviouslycoveredbythesurveysreferencedabove,butitwasnotcompletedatthetimeofpreparationofthisEIR.
Archaeological Site Sensitivity
Program Area
PreviousstudiesthroughouttheprogramareaandeasternAlamedaCountyhavedocumentedthatprehistoricresourcesinthisareaareburiedandmayhavelittleornovisiblesurfaceevidence.Becausethereisanarchaeologicaldistrict(theBrushyPeakArchaeologicalDistrict,asdescribedabove)adjacenttotheprogramarea,thatlocationshouldbeconsideredsensitiveforburiedresources.
Anadditionalareaofarchaeologicalsitesensitivityappearstobeinthesoutheasternportionoftheprogramarea.Thisareacontainsabout50knownresources,primarilyhistoric‐eraarchaeological.Theyconsistofformertownsites,minesandmineshafts,prospectscrapesandrockpilesassociatedwithpitmining,historic‐eraartifactscatters,avarietyofcorrals,troughs,andhistoricroads,aswellastworockoutcrops.Itisthereforepossiblethatadditionalhistoric‐eraarchaeological,aswellasprehistoric,resourcesarepresentwithinthisportionoftheprogramarea.
Afinalareaofarchaeologicalsitesensitivityappearstobeinthemiddleportionoftheprogramarea,alongtheeasternborderinproximitytotheAlamedaandSanJoaquinCountiesboundary.Thisareacontainsabout15historic‐eraarchaeologicalresources,includingformerranchandhousesites,windmillandfarmfeatures,artifactscatters,ahistoric‐erafamilycemetery,atransmissionline,the
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐12
June 2014ICF 00323.08
remainsofareservoir,andfourhistoric‐eraisolates(glassfragments).Itisthereforepossiblethatadditionalhistoric‐eraarchaeologicalresourcesarepresentwithinthisportionoftheprogramarea.
Project Areas
NoresourceshavebeenpreviouslyrecordedinthePattersonPassprojectarea,andthreeresourceshavebeenpreviouslyrecordedintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Bothprojectsiteshavebeenextensivelystudiedthroughavarietyofreports,includingstudiesfortransmissionlinesandwindresources;cellulartowerstudies;area‐wideinventoryreports;andstudiesforcommercialandresidentialdevelopment.Neitherprojectareaisconsideredsensitiveforarchaeologicalresources.
Summary of Native American Contact
Aletter,submittedbyfax,wassenttotheNativeAmericanHeritageCommission(NAHC)onJune20,2013.TheletterdescribedtheprogramandrequestedareviewoftheSacredLandsFilesfortheprogramarea.TheletteralsorequestedalistofinterestedNativeAmericantribalgroupsandindividualswhomayhaveconcernspertainingtoNativeAmericanissuesintheprogramarea.TheNAHCrespondedonJune26,2013,statingthatthesearchfailedtoindicatethepresenceofNativeAmericanculturalresourcesintheimmediateprogramarea.TheNAHCalsoprovidedalistoftheNativeAmericantribalgroupsandindividualstobecontactedregardingtheproposedprogram.
OnJune28,2013,lettersdescribingtheproposedprogramthatincludedamapoftheprogramareaweresenttothefollowingindividuals.
AnnMarieSayers,Chairperson,IndianCanyonMutsunBandofCostanoan
JakkiKehl
KatherineErolindaPerez
RamonaGaribay,Representative,TrinaMarineRuanoFamily
IreneZwierlein,Chairperson,Amah/MutsunTribalBand
RosemaryCambra,Chairperson,MuwekmaOhloneIndianTribeoftheSanFranciscoBayArea
Jean‐MarieFeyling,Amah/MutsunTribalBand
TonyCerda,Chairperson,CoastanoanRumsenCarmelTribe
Perhisrequest,anemailwassenttoAndrewGalvanoftheOhloneIndianTribe.Todate,noresponseshavebeenreceivedfromanyofthosecontacted.NativeAmericanconsultationisongoingandwillbeupdatedforthefinalEIR.
Determination of Significance
InaccordancewithAppendixGoftheStateCEQAGuidelines,programAlternative1,programAlternative2,theGoldenHillsProject,orthePattersonPassProjectwouldbeconsideredtohaveasignificanteffectifitwouldresultinanyoftheconditionslistedbelow.
CauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricalresourceasdefinedinSection15064.5.
CauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresourcepursuanttoSection15064.5.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐13
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries.
Directlyorindirectlydestroyauniquepaleontologicalresourceorsiteoruniquegeologicalfeature.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Whereprojectsareproposedintheprogramarea,asurveyandevaluationtoidentifypotentialhistoricresourcesandare‐evaluationofrecordedhistoricresourceswouldneedtobeconductedintheproject’sareaofpotentialeffect(APE).TheAPEwouldincludethepropertiesadjacenttotheprojectareaiftheprojectmayposeanindirectimpactonahistoricresourcebyalteringitshistoricsetting.Havingasignificantimpactonthehistoricintegrityofapropertybyaffectingitshistoricsettingisasignificantimpactonahistoricresource.IftheAPEofaproposedprojectwithintheprogramareacontainsahistoricresource,asdefinedintheStateCEQAGuidelines,andtheresourcewouldbesubstantiallyadverselychangedbytheproposedproject,theresultingimpactwouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthehistoricresource.
Theprogramhasidentifiedthefollowingconstructionandoperationactivitiesaslikelytooccur.Theseactivitiescouldresultinsubstantialadversechangesinthesignificanceofhistoricalresources.
1. Temporarymeteorologicaltowerinstallation.
a. Iftheconstructionandoperationofthetemporarymeteorologicaltowercausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
2. Temporarystagingareaset‐up.
a. Iftheconstructionandoperationofthetemporarystagingareaset‐upcausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
3. Existingwindturbineremoval.
a. Iftheremovalofanexistingwindturbinecausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
4. Temporarymeteorologicaltowerremoval.
a. Iftheremovalofthetemporarymeteorologicaltowercausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
5. Roadinfrastructureupgrades.
a. Ifanupgradetotheroadinfrastructurecausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐14
June 2014ICF 00323.08
1) Roadinfrastructureupgradesmayincludewideningofexistinginternalroads,wideningofentrancestoaccessroadsandpublicroads,andreplacementofexistingculvertswithlargerones.
6. Windturbineconstruction.
a. Iftheconstructionofanewwindturbinecausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
1) Constructionofthewindturbineswouldincludenewconcretefoundations(see#9),batchplantconstruction(see#7),andcraneareaconstruction(see#9).Boththebatchplantandcraneareaswouldbereclaimedfollowingthecompletionoftheconstructionofthewindturbine.
7. Finalsiteselectionandpreparation.
a. Iftheselectionandpreparationofasitecausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
8. Batchplantconstruction.
a. See#6above.Iftheconstructionofabatchplantcausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
9. Foundationexcavationandconstruction.
a. See#6above.Iftheconstructionandoperationofthefoundationcausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
10. Cranepadconstruction.
a. See#6above.Iftheconstructionofacranepadconstructionareacausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
11. Assemblyoftower.
a. Iftheassemblyofthetowercausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
12. Installationofturbinenacelle.
a. Iftheinstallationofturbinenacellescausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
13. Attachmentofrotors.
a. Iftheattachmentofrotorscausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐15
June 2014ICF 00323.08
14. Collectionsystemupgradesandinstallation.
a. Iftheupgradesandinstallationofthecollectionsystemcausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
15. Communicationsysteminstallation.
a. Iftheinstallationofthecommunicationsystemcausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
16. Permanentmeteorologicaltowerinstallation.
a. Iftheconstructionandoperationofthepermanentmeteorologicaltowercausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
17. Reclamationoflandscape.
a. Ifthereclamationoflandscapecausesthedemolition,destruction,relocation,oralterationofahistoricalresource,theproposedprojectcouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthathistoricalresource.
Mitigationofsignificantimpactsmustlessenoreliminateimpactsthataproposedprojectwillhaveonahistoricresource.Thiscanbeaccomplishedthroughredesigntoeliminateobjectionableordamagingaspectsoftheproject.Examplesincluderedesigningaprojecttoretainratherthanremoveacharacter‐definingfeature,reducingthemassingsizeofaproposednewadditiontothehistoricsetting,orrelocatingastructureoutsidetheboundariesofahistoricsetting.
Relocationofahistoricresourcemayconstituteanadverseimpactontheresource.However,insituationsinwhichrelocationistheonlyfeasiblealternativetodemolition,relocationmaymitigatebelowalevelofsignificanceprovidedthatthenewlocationiscompatiblewiththeoriginalcharacteranduseofthehistoricalresource,andtheresourceretainsitseligibilityforlistingontheCaliforniaRegister(14CCRSection4852(d)(1)).
Inmostcases,theuseofdrawings,photographs,ordisplaysdoesnotmitigatethephysicalimpactontheenvironmentcausedbydemolitionordestructionofahistoricalresource(14CCRSection15126.4(b)).However,CEQArequiresthatallfeasiblemitigationbeundertakenevenifitdoesnotmitigatebelowalevelofsignificance.Inthiscontext,recordationservesalegitimatearchivalpurpose.Thelevelofdocumentationrequiredasmitigationshouldbeproportionatewiththelevelofsignificanceoftheresource(CaliforniaStateParks,OfficeofHistoricPreservation2013).
ImpactCUL‐1a‐1:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricalresource—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Nineteenhistoricarchitecturalresourceshavebeenrecordedwithintheprogramarea.Theremaybemoreunrecordedhistoricresourceswithinthearea.Someofthehistoricresourcesthatwererecordedmaynolongerexistormaybetoosignificantlyalteredtostillbeconsideredhistoricresources,asdefinedinSection15064.5oftheStateCEQAGuidelines.IftheAPEofaproposedprojectwithintheprogramareacontainsahistoricresource,asdefinedintheStateCEQAGuidelines,andtheresourcewouldbesubstantiallyadverselychangedbytheproposedproject,the
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐16
June 2014ICF 00323.08
resultingimpactwouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthehistoricresource.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐1awouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyamendingprojectdesigntoavoidasignificantimpactonthehistoricresource.Ifavoidanceisnotfeasible,thentheimpactwouldbesignificant.MitigationMeasureCUL‐1bwouldreducesuchanimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyrecordingthehistoricresourcefollowingthedocumentationstandardsandguidelinesoftheNationalParkService’s(NPS)HistoricAmericanBuildingSurvey(HABS)orHistoricAmericanEngineeringRecord(HAER).
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1a:Avoidhistoricresources
Wherefeasible,avoidhistoricresourcesindesignandlayoutofaproposedprojectintheprogramarea.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1b:Appropriaterecordationofhistoricresources
IfMitigationMeasureCUL‐1aisdeterminedtobeinfeasible,thesignificantlyaffectedhistoricresourceshouldberecordedfollowingtheguidelinesofNPS,HABS,orHAER.TherecordationdocumentationmustbeprovidedtoNPS,theSHPO,andlocalrepositoriesasdeterminedbyAlamedaCounty.ThedocumentationwithaHABSorHAERreportwillincludewrittendata,aphotographyrecordwithlarge‐formatrectifiedphotography,and,dependingonthelevelofsignificanceoftheresource,anarchitecturaldrawingset.ThestandardsfortheserecordationcomponentsaredefinedinNPSguidance,andthelevelofrecordationisdeterminedbyAlamedaCountyinconsultationwithotherleadagencies,ifrequired.TherearethreestandardlevelsofHABSandHAERrecordationdefinedbytheNPS.
ImpactCUL‐1a‐2:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricalresource—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Nineteenhistoricarchitecturalresourceshavebeenrecordedwithintheprogramarea.Theremaybemoreunrecordedhistoricresourceswithinthearea.Someofthehistoricresourcesthatwererecordedmaynolongerexistormaybetoosignificantlyalteredtostillbeconsideredhistoricresources,asdefinedinSection15064.5oftheStateCEQAGuidelines.IftheAPEofaproposedprojectwithintheprogramareacontainsahistoricresource,asdefinedintheStateCEQAGuidelines,andtheresourcewouldbesubstantiallyadverselychangedbytheproposedproject,theresultingimpactwouldcauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofthehistoricresource.
ImplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐1awouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyamendingprojectdesigntoavoidasignificantimpactonthehistoricresource.Ifavoidanceisnotfeasible,thentheimpactwouldbesignificant.MitigationMeasureCUL‐1bwouldreducesuchanimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyrecordingthehistoricresourcefollowingthedocumentationstandardsandguidelinesoftheNationalParkService’s(NPS)HistoricAmericanBuildingSurvey(HABS)orHistoricAmericanEngineeringRecord(HAER).
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1a:Avoidhistoricresources
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1b:Appropriaterecordationofhistoricresources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐17
June 2014ICF 00323.08
ImpactCUL‐1b:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricresource—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
TheGoldenHillsProjectmaycauseasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricalresource—Dam#3(P01‐010958).Thisresourceistheremainsofanearthendamthatmeasured30feetlong,12feetwide,and10feethigh.Perthe1999recordation,theassociatedpond,locatedbehindit,haddriedup.NootherfeaturesarerecordedorwereobservedduringtheGoogleEarthremotereconnaissancesurveybythearchitecturalhistorianinJune2013.
Dam#3hasnotbeendeterminedeligibletotheCRHRandNRHP.However,Section15064.5states:
Thefactthataresourceisnotlistedin,ordeterminedtobeeligibleforlistingintheCaliforniaRegisterofHistoricalResources,notincludedinalocalregisterorhistoricalresources,oridentifiedinanhistoricalresourcessurveydoesnotprecludealeadagencyfromdeterminingthattheresourcemaybeanhistoricalresourcesasdefinedinPublicResourcesCodesection5020.1(j)or5024.1
Shouldtheproposedprojectrequirethedemolition,destruction,oralterationofthisresourceoritsimmediatesurroundingssuchthatthesignificanceoftheresourceismateriallyimpaired,thenasubstantialadversechangewouldresult.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐1awouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevelbyavoidingthehistoricresource.Ifavoidanceisinfeasible,implementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐1bwouldbeemployed.Becausethedamisanengineeredfeature,anHAERwouldbeappropriatedocumentationtoreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1a:Avoidhistoricresources
MitigationMeasureCUL‐1b:Appropriaterecordationofhistoricresources
ImpactCUL‐1c:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofahistoricresource—PattersonPassProject(noimpact)
TherearenohistoricalresourcesrecordedinanyofthethreeparcelsthatcomprisethePattersonPassProject.NootherfeaturesarerecordedorwereobservedduringtheGoogleEarthremotereconnaissancesurveybythearchitecturalhistorianinJune2013.Therewouldbenoimpact.
ImpactCUL‐2a‐1:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
AsdiscussedinMethodsforAnalysis,avarietyofprehistoricandhistoric‐eraarchaeologicalresourcesarepresentwithintheprogramarea.Giventhelargesizeoftheprogramarea,themoderatetohighsensitivityforburiedsites(especiallynearBrushyPeak),andthemoderatetohighsensitivityforhistoricarchaeologicalresourcestowardstheeasternandsoutheasternportionsoftheprogramarea,thereisapossibilityofencounteringanddamagingpreviouslyunrecordedarchaeologicalresourcesduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,2b,2cand2dwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2a:Conductapreconstructionculturalfieldsurveyandculturalresourcesinventoryandevaluation
AlamedaCountywillrequireapplicantstoretainqualifiedpersonneltoconductanarchaeologicalfieldsurveyoftheprogramareatodeterminewhethersignificantresourcesexist
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐18
June 2014ICF 00323.08
withintheprogramarea.Theinventoryandevaluationwillincludethedocumentationandresultoftheseefforts,theevaluationofanyculturalresourcesidentifiedduringthesurvey,andculturalresourcesmonitoring,ifthesurveyidentifiesthatitisnecessary.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2b:Developatreatmentplanforanyidentifiedsignificantculturalresources
Ifanysignificantresourcesareidentifiedthroughthepreconstructionsurvey,atreatmentplanthatcouldincludesiteavoidance,capping,ordatarecoverywillbedevelopedandimplemented.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2c:Conductworkerawarenesstrainingforarchaeologicalresourcespriortoconstruction
Priortotheinitiationofanysitepreparationand/orthestartofconstruction,theprojectapplicantwillensurethatallconstructionworkersreceivetrainingoverseenbyaqualifiedprofessionalarchaeologistwhoisexperiencedinteachingnonspecialists,toensurethatforepersonsandfieldsupervisorscanrecognizearchaeologicalresources(e.g.,areasofshellfishremains,chippedstoneorgroundstone,historicdebris,buildingfoundations,humanbone)intheeventthatanyarediscoveredduringconstruction.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2d:Stopworkifculturalresourcesareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
Theprojectapplicantwillensurethatconstructionspecificationsincludeastop‐workorderifprehistoricorhistoric‐eraculturalresourcesareunearthedduringground‐disturbingactivities.Ifsuchresourcesareencountered,theprojectapplicantwillimmediatelyhaltallactivitywithin100feetofthefinduntilaqualifiedarchaeologistcanassessthesignificanceofthefind.Prehistoricmaterialsmightincludeobsidianandchertflaked‐stonetools(e.g.,projectilepoints,knives,scrapers)ortool‐makingdebris;culturallydarkenedsoil(“midden”)containingheat‐affectedrocksandartifacts;stonemillingequipment(e.g.,mortars,pestles,handstones,ormillingslabs);andbattered‐stonetools,suchashammerstonesandpittedstones.Historic‐periodmaterialsmightincludestone,concrete,oradobefootingsandwalls;filledwellsorprivies;anddepositsofmetal,glass,and/orceramicrefuse.Ifthefindisdeterminedtobepotentiallysignificant,thearchaeologist,inconsultationwiththeNativeAmericanrepresentative(ifappropriate),willdevelopatreatmentplanthatcouldincludesiteavoidance,capping,ordatarecovery.
ImpactCUL‐2a‐2:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
AsdiscussedinMethodsforAnalysis,avarietyofprehistoricandhistoric‐eraarchaeologicalresourcesarepresentwithintheprogramarea.Giventhelargesizeoftheprogramarea,themoderatetohighsensitivityforburiedsites(especiallynearBrushyPeak),andthemoderatetohighsensitivityforhistoricarchaeologicalresourcestowardtheeasternandsoutheasternportionsoftheprogramarea,thereisapossibilityofencounteringanddamagingpreviouslyunrecordedarchaeologicalresourcesduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,2b,2cand2dwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐19
June 2014ICF 00323.08
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2a:Conductapreconstructionculturalfieldsurveyandculturalresourcesinventoryandevaluation
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2b:Developatreatmentplanforanyidentifiedsignificantculturalresources
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2c:Conductworkerawarenesstrainingforarchaeologicalresourcespriortoconstruction
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2d:Stopworkifculturalresourcesareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
ImpactCUL‐2b:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
ArchaeologicalresourceshavebeenidentifiedintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Damagetothesearchaeologicalresourceswouldbeasignificantimpact,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,CUL‐2b,CUL‐2c,CUL‐2dand2ewouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2a:Conductapreconstructionculturalfieldsurveyandculturalresourcesinventoryandevaluation
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2b:Developatreatmentplanforanyidentifiedsignificantculturalresources
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2c:Conductworkerawarenesstrainingforarchaeologicalresourcespriortoconstruction
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2d:Stopworkifculturalresourcesareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2e:Avoidallculturalresourcesduringconstructionandoperation
Avoidarchaeologicalresourcesindesign,layout,construction,andoperationoftheproposedproject.
ImpactCUL‐2c:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
AlthoughnoculturalresourceshavebeenidentifiedinthePattersonPassprojectarea,thereisthepossibilityofencounteringanddamagingpreviouslyunrecordedarchaeologicalresourcesduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,2b,2c,and2dwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2a:Conductapreconstructionculturalfieldsurveyandculturalresourcesinventoryandevaluation
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2b:Developatreatmentplanforanyidentifiedsignificantculturalresources
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐20
June 2014ICF 00323.08
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2c:Conductworkerawarenesstrainingforarchaeologicalresourcespriortoconstruction
MitigationMeasureCUL‐2d:Stopworkifculturalresourcesareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
ImpactCUL‐3a‐1:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Althoughthereisnoindicationthattheprogramareahasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresentintheprogramarea,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐3:Stopworkifhumanremainsareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
Theprojectapplicantwillensuretheconstructionspecificationsincludeastop‐workorderifhumanremainsarediscoveredduringconstructionordemolition.Therewillbenofurtherexcavationordisturbanceofthesitewithina100‐footradiusofthelocationofsuchdiscovery,oranynearbyareareasonablysuspectedtooverlieadjacentremains.TheAlamedaCountyCoronerwillbenotifiedandwillmakeadeterminationastowhethertheremainsareNativeAmerican.IftheCoronerdeterminesthattheremainsarenotsubjecttohisauthority,hewillnotifytheNativeAmericanHeritageCommission,whowillattempttoidentifydescendantsofthedeceasedNativeAmerican.Ifnosatisfactoryagreementcanbereachedastothedispositionoftheremainspursuanttothisstatelaw,thenthelandownerwillre‐interthehumanremainsanditemsassociatedwithNativeAmericanburialsonthepropertyinalocationnotsubjecttofurthersubsurfacedisturbance.AfinalreportwillbesubmittedtoAlamedaCounty.Thisreportwillcontainadescriptionofthemitigationprogramanditsresults,includingadescriptionofthemonitoringandtestingresourcesanalysismethodologyandconclusionsandadescriptionofthedisposition/curationoftheresources.
ImpactCUL‐3a‐2:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
Althoughthereisnoindicationthattheprogramareahasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresentintheprogramarea,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐3:Stopworkifhumanremainsareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
ImpactCUL‐3b:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
AlthoughthereisnoindicationthattheGoldenHillsprojectareahasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresent,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐21
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐3:Stopworkifhumanremainsareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
ImpactCUL‐3c:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)
AlthoughthereisnoindicationthatthePPPShasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresentinthelargerProgramarea,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.
MitigationMeasureCUL‐3:Stopworkifhumanremainsareencounteredduringground‐disturbingactivities
3.5.3 References Cited
Bennyhoff,J.A.1994a.TheNapaDistrictandWappoPrehistory.InR.E.Hughes(ed.).TowardaNewTaxonomicFrameworkforCentralCaliforniaArchaeology:EssaysbyJamesA.BennyhoffandDavidA.Fredrickson.Pages49–56.Berkeley,CA:ContributionsoftheUniversityofCaliforniaArchaeologicalResearchFacility52.
———.1994b.VariationwithintheMeganosCulture.InR.E.Hughes(ed.).TowardaNewTaxonomicFrameworkforCentralCaliforniaArchaeology:EssaysbyJamesA.BennyhoffandDavidA.Fredrickson.Pages81–89.Berkeley,CA:ContributionsoftheUniversityofCaliforniaArchaeologicalResearchFacility52.
———.1994c.ADeltaIntrusiontotheBayintheLateMiddlePeriodinCentralCalifornia.InR.E.Hughes(ed.).TowardaNewTaxonomicFrameworkforCentralCaliforniaArchaeology:EssaysbyJamesA.BennyhoffandDavidA.Fredrickson.Pages7–13.Berkeley,CA:ContributionsoftheUniversityofCaliforniaArchaeologicalResearchFacility52.
CaliforniaStateParks,OfficeofHistoricPreservation.2013.HowCanSubstantialAdverseChangebeAvoidedorMitigated?Available:http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21727.Accessed:June2013.
Cook,S.F.1943a.TheConflictbetweentheCaliforniaIndiansandWhiteCivilization,I:TheIndianVersustheSpanishMission.Ibero‐Americana21.Berkeley,CA.
———.1943b.TheConflictbetweentheCaliforniaIndiansandWhiteCivilization,II:ThePhysicalandDemographicReactionoftheNon‐missionIndiansinColonialandProvincialCalifornia.Ibero‐Americana22.Berkeley,CA.
Elsasser,A.B.1978.DevelopmentofRegionalPrehistoricCultures.InR.F.Heizer(ed.).California.Pages37–57.HandbookofNorthAmericanIndians.Vol.8.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington,D.C.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐22
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Fentress,J.,andA.Guerrero.2010.DistrictRecordforP‐01‐011111,theBrushyPeakArchaeologicalDistrict(EastBayRegionalParkDistrict).RecordonfileattheNorthwestInformationCenter,SonomaStateUniversity,RohnertPark,CA.
Fredrickson,D.A.1994.ChangesinPrehistoricExchangeSystemsintheAlamoLocality,ContraCostaCounty,CA.InR.E.Hughes(ed.).TowardaNewTaxonomicFrameworkforCentralCaliforniaArchaeology:EssaysbyJamesA.BennyhoffandDavidA.Fredrickson.Pages57–64.ContributionsoftheUniversityofCaliforniaArchaeologicalResearchFacility52.
Groza,R.G.2002.AnAMSChronologyforCentralCaliforniaOlivellaShellBeads.Master’sthesis.DepartmentofAnthropology,CaliforniaStateUniversity,SanFrancisco.
Hylkema,M.G.(ed.).2007.SantaClaraValleyPrehistory:ArchaeologicalInvestigationsatCA‐SCL‐690,theTamienStationSite,SanJose,California.Originallypreparedfor:CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation,OfficeofEnvironmentalPlanning,South,District4,Oakland,CA.UniversityofCalifornia,Davis:CenterforArchaeologicalResearchatDavisPublicationno.15.
Ingram,B.L.1998.DifferencesinRadiocarbonAgeBetweenShellandCharcoalfromaHoloceneShellmoundinNorthernCalifornia.QuaternaryResearch49:102–110.
Kroeber,A.L.1925.HandbookoftheIndiansofCalifornia.BureauofAmericanEthnologyBulletin78.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington,D.C.Reprinted1976byDoverPublications,NY.
Levy,R.1978.Costanoan.InR.F.Heizer(ed.).California.Pages485–495.HandbookofNorthAmericanIndians.Vol.8.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington,D.C.
Milliken,R.1995.ATimeofLittleChoice.BallenaPress,MenloPark,CA.
Milliken,R.,R.T.Fitzgerald,M.G.Hylkema,R.Groza,T.Origer,D.G.Bieling,A.Leventhal,R.S.Wiberg,A.Gottsfield,D.Gillette,V.Bellifemine,E.Strother,R.Cartier,andD.A.Fredrickson.2007.Chapter8:PunctuatedCultureChangeintheSanFranciscoBayArea.InJones,TerryL.,andKathrynA.Klar(eds.).CaliforniaPrehistory:Colonization,Culture,andComplexity.Pages99–123.Lanham,MD:AltaMiraPress.
Nelson,N.C.1909.ShellmoundsoftheSanFranciscoBayRegion.UniversityofCaliforniaPublicationsinAmericanArchaeologyandEthnology7(4):309–356.
Newland,M.,andK.Erickson.2010.PrimaryRecordforP‐01‐011054,theTeslaComplex.RecordonfileattheNorthwestInformationCenter,SonomaStateUniversity,RohnertPark,CA.
Rosenthal,J.,andJ.Meyer.2004.LandscapeEvolutionandtheArchaeologicalRecord:AGeoarchaeologicalStudyoftheSouthernSantaClaraValleyandSurroundingRegion.CenterforArchaeologicalResearchatDavisPublicationNo.14.Davis,CA.
Schenck,W.E.1926.HistoricAboriginalGroupsoftheCaliforniaDeltaRegion.UniversityofCaliforniaPublicationsinAmericanArchaeologyandEthnology23(2):123–146.Berkeley,CA.
Wallace,W.J.,andD.W.Lathrop.1975.WestBerkeley(CA‐ALA‐307):ACulturallyStratifiedShellmoundontheEastShoreofSanFranciscoBay.ContributionsoftheUniversityofCaliforniaArchaeologicalResearchFacility29.
Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis
Cultural Resources
APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.5‐23
June 2014ICF 00323.08
Wiberg,R.S.1996.ArchaeologicalInvestigationsandBurialRemovalatSitesCA‐ALA‐483,CA‐ALA‐483Extension,andCA‐ALA‐555,Pleasanton,AlamedaCounty,California.HolmanandAssociates,SanFrancisco.SubmittedtoDavidonHomes,WalnutCreek.CopiesavailablefromNorthwestInformationCenter,SonomaStateUniversity,RohnertPark,CA.