RES 2026023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc. CalVTP Project-Specific Analysis and Addendum Augustin Bernal Community Park Fuel Reduction November 2025 4-17 4.4.1. Discussion A cultural resources assessment report has been prepared for the project area (Attachment B), which includes the treatment areas. The methods performed for this report included a background records search consistent with SPR CUL-1, notifications to local Native American representatives consistent with SPR CUL-2, cultural resource research consistent with SPR CUL-3, and a stratified sampling-approach pedestrian survey of the project area consistent with SPR CUL-4. A record search was requested at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) to determine whether any portions of the project area had been previously surveyed for cultural resources and identify the presence of any previously recorded cultural resources within the project area, as well as a 0.25-mile buffer (the search radius). The records search was received on March 27, 2025 (NWIC File No. 24-1367). Other sources of information that were reviewed included, but were not limited to, the current listings of properties on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Historical Landmarks, California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Points of Historical Interest as listed in the Office of Historic Preservation’s Historic Property Directory, and the Built Environment Resource Directory for Alameda County (OHP 2025). No resources have been previously recorded within the project area or search radius, and no CRHR- or NRHP-listed historical resources or properties have been recorded within the treatment area or the search radius. According to the record search results, the boundaries of 2 previous studies intersect the project area. Of the approximately 162 acres of land within the project area, about 152 acres have been previously surveyed for cultural resources. A pedestrian survey was conducted on June 9, 2025, by Montrose Environmental archaeologists. Due to the extensive steep topography in the project area, the survey strategy was stratified to take into account both slope and accessibility from a travel-cost perspective. Specifically, some portions of the project area that represented slopes of 10 percent or lower and were over 2 acres in area were subjected to more intensive survey techniques (transects of 20 meters or less). Not all areas that represent these flat slopes were surveyed due to their isolation within areas surrounded by steep hillsides. Other areas that represented slopes between 10 and 20 percent were surveyed, based on sensitivity and lack of isolation within steeper areas, using wider intervals of 20 to 40 meters. No other areas were subject to pedestrian survey due to the steepness of the slopes (greater than 20 percent) or, as mentioned above, because they were isolated within areas surrounded by steep mountainous areas where the travel costs on foot would minimize the potential for long-term habitation or settlement by prehistoric populations (Byrd et al. 2017). A total of about 60 acres were subject to either intensive or cursory archaeological survey. A hand trowel was used to remove vegetation in order to observe the ground surface throughout the surveyed areas. In addition, due to the heavy vegetation and grass cover that overlays the entire project area, two shovel test pits were dug in areas considered of higher sensitivity for archaeological resources