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.


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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


Cultural Resources


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).


Cultural Resources


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


Cultural Resources


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),


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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


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


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)


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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


Cultural Resources


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).




Cultural Resources


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.



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


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


June 2014ICF 00323.08





ImpactCUL‐2b:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

ArchaeologicalresourceshavebeenidentifiedintheGoldenHillsprojectarea.Damagetothesearchaeologicalresourceswouldbeasignificantimpact,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,CUL‐2b,CUL‐2c,CUL‐2dand2ewouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.





MitigationMeasureCUL‐2e:Avoidallculturalresourcesduringconstructionandoperation

Avoidarchaeologicalresourcesindesign,layout,construction,andoperationoftheproposedproject.

ImpactCUL‐2c:Causeasubstantialadversechangeinthesignificanceofanarchaeologicalresource—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

AlthoughnoculturalresourceshavebeenidentifiedinthePattersonPassprojectarea,thereisthepossibilityofencounteringanddamagingpreviouslyunrecordedarchaeologicalresourcesduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasuresCUL‐2a,2b,2c,and2dwouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.




Cultural Resources


June 2014ICF 00323.08



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.


ImpactCUL‐3b:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

AlthoughthereisnoindicationthattheGoldenHillsprojectareahasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresent,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.


Cultural Resources


June 2014ICF 00323.08

Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.


ImpactCUL‐3c:Disturbanyhumanremains,includingthoseinterredoutsideofformalcemeteries—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

AlthoughthereisnoindicationthatthePPPShasbeenusedforhumanburials,becauseprehistoricsitesareknowntobepresentinthelargerProgramarea,thepossibilitycannotbediscountedentirely.Althoughthepossibilityisunlikely,humanremainscouldbediscoveredduringground‐disturbingactivities.Thisimpactwouldbesignificant,butimplementationofMitigationMeasureCUL‐3wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.


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.


Cultural Resources


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.


Cultural Resources


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.

3.5 cultural resources - acgov.org

Documents