SR0082985_SSNL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4.3 – Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Draft Environmental Impact Report February 2021 14800 W. Schulte Road Logistics Center 4.3-11 Threshold D: Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As described above, several fossils have been found in the vicinity of the Project area in 1948 during construction of the Delta Mendota Canal. These fossils include mammoth/mastodon, horse, pocket gopher, and other unspecified rodents, and unidentified artiodactyl (hoofed mammal) bone. As such, Project development has the potential to impact unknown paleontological resources because of its grading and construction activities. However, the Project site has been subject to extensive disturbance, including previous grading and utility excavation activities, that occurred as a result of the prior on -site biomass energy facility. In addition, previous development of the Project site involved the placement of artificial fill on the site. Human-transported fill materials generally do not contain significant paleontological resources on or very near the surface immediately underlying the Project site. These activities have resulted in a Project site that is highly variable, containing various depressions as deep as 20 feet below ground surface. Given the extent of this disturbance, it is unlikely that paleontological resources, if they were ever present on sit e, would remain intact. Nonetheless, it is possible that significant fossils could be discovered during excavation activities, even in areas with a low likelihood of occurrence. Fossils encountered during excavation could be inadvertently damaged. As such, MM-CUL-3 shall be required. MM-CUL-1 would require that in the event that paleontological resources are discovered, all construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified paleontologist, as defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, can assess the nature and importance of the find and recommend either salvage or recovery of the resource. record the find and allow work to continue or recommend salvage and recovery of the resource. Implementation of MM-CUL-3 would ensure that the Project’s impacts with regard to unique paleontological resources would be less than significant. Threshold E: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? AND Threshold F: Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth i n subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 ? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe . Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS and NAHC SLF records searches, including background research as summarized above, no previously recorded archaeological resources of Native American origin or TCRs listed in the CRHR or a local register or in any other of the records reviewed were identified within the Project site. Further, no TCRs have been identified by California Native American tribes as part of the County’s AB 52 notification process, and no California Native American tribes requested consultation with the County.