Laserfiche WebLink
4.3 – Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources <br />Draft Environmental Impact Report February 2021 <br />14800 W. Schulte Road Logistics Center 4.3-2 <br />Historical Maps and Aerial Photographs Review <br />Dudek consulted historical topographic maps and aerial photographs through the Nationwide Environmental Title <br />Research (NETR) to understand development of the Project site and surrounding properties. Topographic maps are <br />available from 1916 to 2018, and aerial images are available from 1949 to 2016 (Appendix D). <br />Topographic maps show the Project site as undeveloped from 1916 to 1951. The 1953 topographic map shows a <br />pipeline transecting the northwest section of the Project site toward the southeast section. The 1965 topographic <br />map shows no significant change to the Project site since the 1953 topographic map was created. The 1969 <br />topographic map shows Quality Road and a structure within the northeast corner of the Project site. The following <br />topographic maps show no change to the Project site until 2012. The 2012 topographic map does n ot show the <br />pipeline first seen in 1953, Quality Road, or the structure that was previously present within the northeast corner <br />of the Project site; instead, the topographic map shows a pool of water within the northeast corner of the Project <br />site. Aside from understanding a general level of development, topographic maps do not depict minute changes <br />within the Project site or surrounding blocks (Appendix D). <br />The 1949 aerial shows a line transecting from the northwest section of the Project site toward the southeast <br />section, presumably the pipeline shown on the 1953 topographic map. Other than the presence of this pipeline, <br />the Project site appears to have been undeveloped in 1949. The 1967 and 1968 aerials show the Project site being <br />used for agricultural purposes. The 1968 aerial shows the pipeline originally seen in 1953; it is not visible in any <br />aerials after 1968. There appears to have been a structure within the northeast corner of the Project site, which is <br />consistent with the 1969 topographic map; however, the quality of the aerial does not illustrate what the structure <br />was. In the 1982 aerial, the Project site no longer appears to be used for agricultural purposes. At the time the <br />1982 aerial was taken, the Project site was cleared except for the structure within the northeast corner. From 1993 <br />to 2016, aerials show that the Project site was being used as a biomass facility (Appendix D). <br />Native American Coordination <br />Sacred Lands File Search and Tribal Outreach <br />Dudek contacted the NAHC on October 6, 2020, requesting a review of its SLF for the Project site. In a response <br />letter received via email on November 12, 2020, the NAHC stated that the results of the SLF search were negative <br />for known cultural resources. <br />Assembly Bill 52 <br />A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource <br />(TCR) is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (California Public Resources Code [PRC] <br />Section 21084.2). Under AB 52, a TCR must have tangible, geographically defined properties that can be impacted <br />by project implementation. The Project is subject to compliance with AB 52. <br />On December 18, 2020, in compliance with the requirements of AB 52, Dudek personnel mailed letters of notification, <br />on behalf of the County, concerning the Project site to each contact on the NAHC’s AB 52 list that has requested <br />project notifications from the County pursuant to AB 52 and that are on file with the NAHC as being traditionally or <br />culturally affiliated with the geographic area. These notification letters included a Project map and description inquiring <br />if the tribe would like to discuss the Project and the potential to impact any potential TCRs. AB 52 allows tribes 30 <br />days after receiving notification to request consultation. If a response is not received within the allotted 30 days, it is