Historic Property Survey Report - PDF by vzm51964

VIEWS: 69 PAGES: 58

									DRAFT


Historic Property Survey Report
for the

La Loma Road Bridge
Over the Arroyo Seco
City of Pasadena, Los Angeles County, CALIFORNIA
from Arroyo Boulevard to Rockwood Road




PREPARED FOR


City of Pasadena
Public Works Department
100 N. Garfield Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91109




PREPARED BY


Jessica B. Feldman, Architectural Historian
Myra L. Frank & Associates, Inc./Jones & Stokes Associates
811 West Seventh Street, Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90017



                                      July 2005
                            HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT
California Department of Transportation



                            1. UNDERTAKING DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
District   County       Route      Kilo Posts    Post Miles       Charge Unit       Expenditure Authorization
7          LA           0
(Both kilometer posts and post miles must be completed above. Insert project description below & refer reader to
location and vicinity maps in HPSR)

Project Description:
The Public Works Department in the City of Pasadena (City), in cooperation with Caltrans (Caltrans)
and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing to rehabilitate and retrofit the existing
La Loma Road Bridge(Bridge #53C-0759) over the Arroyo Seco Channel between Arroyo Boulevard
and Rockwood Road in the City of Pasadena, Los Angeles County. The 378-foot long Neoclassical
reinforced concrete arch bridge was built in 1914 over the Arroyo Seco Channel. (Please see
Attachment 1 and 2 for maps of the proposed project.)

The current bridge carries two lanes of vehicular traffic, each 14-feet wide with five-foot wide
cantilevered sidewalks, one in each direction. Deteriorated bridge conditions include rusted roadway
expansion joints due to improper drainage, exposed reinforcing bars due to inadequate concrete cover,
and cracks and spalling throughout the bridge. The existing spandrel arch bridge has two main spans
and three approach spans supported on three piers and six rows of columns in the Arroyo Seco.

Alternative 1: Existing Bridge Retrofit and Rehabilitation Alternative
Retrofit describes the strengthening, reinforcement, and other activities necessary to enable the bridge
to withstand earthquake forces generally in accordance with current seismic design standards.
Rehabilitation includes aesthetic elements and repairs that would contribute to the bridge’s overall
appearance and function but are not required to ensure its seismic performance. Both retrofit and
rehabilitation address improvements that would be implemented to preserve and continue to use
substantial portions of the existing La Loma Road Bridge. This alternative is the Locally Preferred
Alternative (LPA).

Alternative 2: Box Girder Design
Replacement refers to options that would replace the existing bridge with an entirely new bridge
structure. In this alternative, a cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box girder would be constructed.
Architectural features can be included as rustication on the pier column faces and the exterior of the
barrier railings, and in the shape of the exterior box girder web. A more ornamental railing treatment
could be developed for enhanced aesthetics.

Alternative 3: Box Girder with Decorative Arches
This alternative is similar to Alternative 2, but with decorative arches.

                                2. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS
The Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project was established in consultation with Gary Iverson,
Caltrans PQS in Archaeology, and Jim Kaufman, Project Manager, on 3/3/2004. The APE maps are
located in Attachment 3 in this Historic Property Survey Report.
The APE was established as based on the proposed project including the existing and maximum right-
of-way required for the completed project, property for which construction easements would be
necessary, any areas where changes in ingress and egress access would occur, areas where visual or
audible change would be apparent, and the location of the placement of construction materials and

For the federal undertaking described in Part 1: To minimize redundancy and paperwork for the California
Department of Transportation and the State Historic Preservation Officer, and in the spirit intended under the federal
Paperwork Reduction Act (U.S.C. 44 Chapter 35), this document also satisfies consideration under California
Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section §15064.5(a) and, as appropriate, Public Resources Code §5024 (a)(b)
and (d).
[HPSR form: 01-07-04]                                                                               Page 1
                         HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT
California Department of Transportation

equipment. Based on these factors, the boundary of the proposed APE was limited to the width of the
bridge once widened. There are no other structures within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) besides
the bridge.




                     3. CONSULTING PARTIES / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
(For the following, list names, dates, and locations and results of contacts, as appropriate. List
organizations/persons contacted and attach correspondence and summarize verbal comments received as
appropriate.)
      Local Government (Head of local government, Preservation Office / Planning Department)

      Native American Tribes, Groups and Individuals
      Samuel H. Dunlap
      LA City/County Native American Indian Commission
      Cindi Alvitre, Ti'At Society
      Robert F. Dorame, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council
      Anthony Morales, Gabrielino/Tongva Tribal Council
      Craig Torres
      Jim Velasques
      Gabrielino/Tongva Council / Gabrielino Tongva Nation
      Ms. Susan Frank Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians of California
      Native American Heritage Commission
      Letter requesting review of Sacred Lands files, 1 October 2003
      Local Historical Society / Historic Preservation Group (also if applicable, city archives, etc.)
      Pasadena Heritage
      Public Information Meetings [list locations, dates below and attach copies of notices]
      La Loma Bridge Scoping Meeting, location unknown, November 13, 2003
      Other
      Society for Architectural Historians, Southern California Chapter
      Historical Society of Southern California
      Los Angeles Conservancy
      Los Angeles County Historic Landmarks and Records Commission
      Pasadena Museum of History
      Arroyo Seco Foundation
      Pasadena Historical
      City of Pasadena Planning Department, Design & Historic Preservation Section
      City of Pasadena Planning Department, Community Planning Section
      City of Pasadena Council Member Steve Madison
                                          4. PROPERTIES IDENTIFIED
(Check the appropriate category, list properties, or refer reader to appropriate technical study attached, according
to their National Register status. Provide, as appropriate, complete address, period and level of significance,
criteria, map reference, and any existing state or local designation. Do not include properties that are not within
the APE. Attach previous SHPO determinations, as applicable.)
      No cultural resources in APE or resources as described in Section 7 below.
      Properties previously listed or determined eligible or not eligible (include date of listing or
      determination):
      •    La Loma Bridge, listed in the National Register of Historic Places on July 14, 2004. The bridge is
           located over the Arroyo Seco, between Arroyo Boulevard and Rockwood Road in the City of
           Pasadena, Los Angeles County. The La Loma Road Bridge was found to meet National Register
           Criterion A, in the area of transportation, as it is representative of the City of Pasadena’s economic
           and physical need to facilitate vehicular movement across the Arroyo Seco. The bridge is also
           eligible for the National Register under Criterion C, for its embodiment of a Neoclassical style, open-
           spandrel arch, reinforced concrete bridge, and as a reflection of the history of the City Beautiful


[HPSR form: 01-04]                                                                                   Page 2
                         HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT
California Department of Transportation

            movement in the City of Pasadena.
      Caltrans, on behalf of FHWA, has determined that there are archaeological sites considered
      eligible for the National Register without conducting subsurface testing or surface collection
      within the APE, which will be protected from any potential effects by the establishment of an
      ESA, in accordance with Section 106 PA Stipulation VIII.C. See attached documentation.
      • Site 19-003346 consist of a large area of locally darkened soils containing historical artifacts,
           including melted glass, slag, ceramics, and metal. Based on what is visible on the surface and exposed
           through limited testing, it seems likely that the archaeological site does have the potential to contribute
           new information important in history, and thus be eligible for the National Register under Criterion D.
           Additional research and further evaluation would be required to fully establish eligibility for the
           NRHP. However, within the currently defined APE, Site 19-003346 retains little integrity and
           subsurface disturbances are not likely to impact the resource. An ESA will be established to protect
           the intact portion of 19-003346 beyond the APE boundaries.
      Caltrans, on behalf of FHWA, has determined the following properties are eligible:
      •
      Caltrans, on behalf of FHWA, has determined the following properties are not eligible:
      •
             ,        , who meets the Professionally Qualified Staff Standards in Section 106
      Programmatic Agreement (Section 106 PA) Attachment 1 as a(n)                       , has reviewed the
      project’s APE and confirmed that the only other properties present within the APE meet the
      criteria for Section 106 PA Attachment 4 (Properties Exempt from Evaluation).
      State-owned historical buildings and structures to be added to the Master List, per PRC
      §5024(d):
      •
      State-owned buildings and structures that are not eligible:
      •
                                     5. LIST OF SOURCES CONSULTED
      National Register of Historic Places              Month & Year: 1979-2002 & supplements
      California Register of Historical Resources       Year: 1992 & supplemental information to date
      California Inventory of Historic Resources        Year: 1976
      California Historical Landmarks                   Year: 1995 & supplemental information to date
      California Points of Historical Interest          Year: 1992 & supplemental information to date
      State Historic Resources Commission               Year: 1980-present, minutes from quarterly
                                                        meetings
      Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Inventory        Year: 2003 & supplemental information to date
      Archaeological Site Records [List names of Institutions & date below]
      Site 19-003057, South Central Coastal Informaton Center
      Other sources consulted [e.g., historical societies, city archives, etc. List names, dates and
      results below]
      South Central Coastal Information Center, October 2003
      City of Pasadena Library, various dates
      Pasadena Heritage, December 2004
                                6. LIST OF ATTACHED DOCUMENTATION
(Provide the author/date and peer reviewer/ date of the technical reports)
      Project Vicinity, Location, and APE Maps
      California Historic Bridge Inventory sheet
      Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRER)

      Archaeological Survey Report (ASR)
      Positive Archaeological Survey Report
      Archaeological Excavation Report (CARIDAP, XPI, PII, PIII)
      Extended Phase I
      Other (Specify below)



[HPSR form: 01-04]                                                                                    Page 3
                         HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT
California Department of Transportation


                 7. FINDINGS – Do Not Transmit to State Historic Preservation Officer
(Check all that apply)
      A. No cultural resources are present within the project’s APE.
      B. The only cultural resources present within the project’s APE are properties that are exempt
      from evaluation because they meet the criteria of Section 106 PA Attachment 4:
                  ,       , who meets the Professionally Qualified Staff Standards in Section 106 PA
            Attachment 1 as a(n)        , has reviewed the project’s APE and confirmed that the only
            other properties present within the APE meet the criteria for Section 106 PA Attachment 4
            (Properties Exempt from Evaluation).
      C. Properties previously determined not eligible in consultation with the SHPO, or formally
      determined not eligible by the Keeper of the National Register. Copy of SHPO/Keeper
      correspondence is attached.
      Bridges listed as Category 5 in the Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Inventory. Appropriate
      pages from the Caltrans Historic Bridge Inventory are attached.
                  8. FINDINGS – Transmit to State Historic Preservation Officer
(Check all that apply)
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined that there are no historic properties
      within the APE of the proposed undertaking. Under Section 106 PA Stipulation VIII.C, Caltrans
      requests SHPO’s concurrence in this determination.
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined that there are properties eligible for
      inclusion in the National Register within the APE of the proposed project. Under Section 106
      PA Stipulation VIII.C, Caltrans requests SHPO’s concurrence in this determination.
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined that there are properties that are not
      eligible for inclusion the National Register within the APE of the proposed project. Under
      Section 106 PA Stipulation VIII.C, Caltrans requests SHPO’s concurrence in this determination.
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined a Finding of No Historic Properties
      Affected, according to Section 106 PA Stipulation IX.A and 36 CFR 800.4(d)(1), is appropriate
      for this undertaking.
      Caltrans has determined that there are state-owned historical buildings and structures that
      meet National Register and/or the State Historical Landmarks eligibility criteria and
      requests that SHPO add such resources to the Master List of Historical Resources pursuant to
      PRC §5024(d).
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined a Finding of No Adverse Effect with
      Standard Conditions - ESAs, according to Section 106 PA Stipulation X.B(2) and 36 CFR
      800.5(b), is appropriate for this undertaking. (Include description of ESAs and enforcement
      measures below.)
      The site location data presented in this document, particularly site location maps, are of a sensitive nature
      and must remain confidential. The ESA consists of a large area of locally darkened soils containing
      historical artifacts, including melted glass, slag, ceramics, and metal. The site is north of and adjacent to
      the existing La Loma Bridge, in a flat area west of the Arroyo Seco.

      Construction associated with the La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project may include grading
      and possibly removal of some or all of the bridges structural elements. Because the portions of this site
      within the APE retain little integrity, and have little archaeological potential, the project can proceed
      without adverse effect to this potentially historic property. However, the site outside the APE retains
      integrity, and the cultural deposit is visible at the surface. To protect the site area outside of the APE from
      inadvertent damage, temporary construction fencing should be erected to surround this portion of the site
      during construction. Vehicle or pedestrian access within this fenced area by all personnel should be
      prohibited during construction.
      Caltrans, under the authority of FHWA, has determined a Finding of No Adverse Effect with
      Standard Conditions – Rehabilitation, according to Section 106 PA Stipulation X.B(2) and 36
      CFR 800.5(b), is appropriate for this undertaking.                , who meets the Professionally Qualified
      Staff Standards in Section 106 PA Attachment 1 as Principal Architectural Historian, and has the
      appropriate education and experience, has reviewed the rehabilitation documentation and
      determined that they meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
      Properties. (Include description of Rehabilitation below or indicate below which HPSR


[HPSR form: 01-04]                                                                                   Page 4
ATTACHMENT 3: PROJECT MAP
ATTACHMENT 4: CALTRANS BRIDGE INVENTORY SHEET
                                      CONFIDENTIALITY

The site location data presented in this document, particularly site location maps, are of a sensitive
nature and must remain confidential. Caution must be exercised in distributing this information.
Maps should be available only to managers, officials, and other professionals who have a legitimate
“need to know” for purposes of avoiding site impacts during construction or otherwise managing
historic properties during project implementation.




                                                   ii
                                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT........................................................................................... ii

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.........................................................................................................v

1.0      INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1

2.0      HIGHWAY PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION.........................................2
         2.1 Project Description ...................................................................................................2

3.0      SOURCES CONSULTED .................................................................................................4
         3.1  Introduction ..............................................................................................................4
         3.2  Cultural Resources Literature and Records Search .................................................4
         3.3  Archival Research ...................................................................................................4
         3.4  Native American Consultation ................................................................................4

4.0      BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................6
         4.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................6
         4.2 Environmental Setting ..............................................................................................6
         4.3 Prehistory .................................................................................................................7
         4.4 Ethnography.............................................................................................................8
         4.5 History......................................................................................................................8
             4.5.1 Pasadena........................................................................................................8
             4.5.2 La Loma Bridge ............................................................................................9
             4.5.3 Arroyo Seco Channelization .......................................................................11

5.0      FIELD METHODS..........................................................................................................12

6.0      STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................13
         6.1 Introduction............................................................................................................13
         6.2 Site 19-003346 .......................................................................................................13
         6.3 Preliminary Significance Evaluation .....................................................................17
         6.4 Conclusions............................................................................................................18

7.0      REFERENCES.................................................................................................................19

APPENDIX A:                   ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD
APPENDIX B:                   NATIVE AMERICAN CORRESPONDENCE
APPENDIX C:                   LIST OF ARTIFACTS RECOVERED




                                                                   iii
                                                 List of Figures

1   1910 Sanborn Map Depicting the Project Area .................................................................10
2   Overview of Site 19-003346..............................................................................................13
3   Map of Site 19-003346 ......................................................................................................14
4   Detail of Sediments, Site 19-003346 .................................................................................16
5   Pig Figurine Recovered from 19-003346 .........................................................................17

                                                  List of Tables

1   Summary of Shovel Test Characteristics...........................................................................15




                                                            iv
                                 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) was prepared for the City of Pasadena, the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), and the California Department of Transportation District 7,
(Caltrans). The La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project is located on La Loma
Road, in the City of Pasadena, California. The bridge spans the Arroyo Seco, a major tributary
of the Los Angeles River. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) encompasses an area extending
twenty feet north and south of the existing La Loma Bridge, and includes the entire span of the
bridge. A Phase I cultural resources survey and subsequent Extended Phase I survey
documented one newly discovered historical archaeological site, 19-003346 (CA-LAN-3346). A
Primary Record and an Archaeological Site Record were prepared for this site and are included
in Appendix A.

An initial field survey located site 19-003346 on 26 March 2004. This survey was supplemented
by limited archival research to attempt to determine age and function of this historic-era site.
The site inspection and archival research however, could not conclusively determine site
boundaries, association, or depositional date, so an Extended Phase I survey was implemented.
A work plan was prepared and submitted per Caltrans’ 2001 guidelines. The Extended Phase I
was designed to investigate the site’s depositional characteristics archaeological data potential.
It included shovel testing, surface definition of site boundaries, and limited artifact evaluation.

Extended Phase I Survey took place on 28 and 29 April 2005. Goals included determination of
depth and limits of the deposit and characterization of cultural constituents inside and outside the
APE. Shovel testing was also intended to determine if recovered artifacts reflect site usage and
would permit temporal placement of the deposits. As well, if sufficient information was
forthcoming, a preliminary assessment of data potential and site significance could be offered.
This ASR summarizes the results of the cultural resources survey and the recent Extended Phase
I investigation, both conducted by Applied EarthWorks, Inc.

The physical remains found at Site 19-003346 consist of a large area of locally darkened soils
containing historical artifacts, including melted glass, slag, ceramics, and metal. The site is north
of and adjacent to the existing La Loma Bridge, in a flat area west of the Arroyo Seco. The La
Loma Bridge was constructed in 1914 and may have been the third bridge at this location
(Crocker 1968:30, 34). Based on what is visible on the surface and exposed through limited
testing, it seems likely that the archaeological site does have the potential to contribute new
information important in history. Additional research and further evaluation would be required
to establish eligibility for the NRHP.

Within the currently defined APE, Site 19-003346 retains little integrity and below ground
disturbances are not likely to impact the resource. However, unanticipated buried cultural
resources could be revealed during construction, in, or beyond the APE.

It is Caltrans’ policy to avoid cultural resources whenever possible. Further investigations may
be needed if the site cannot be avoided by the project. If buried cultural materials are
encountered during construction, it is Caltrans’ policy that work stop in that area until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the find. Additional survey will be
required if the project changes to include areas not previously surveyed.
                                                  v
                                           1.0
                                      INTRODUCTION


The Public Works Department of the City of Pasadena, in cooperation with Caltrans and the
FHWA, proposes to replace or rehabilitate the La Loma Bridge in the City of Pasadena. The
bridge spans the Arroyo Seco between Rockwood Road and Arroyo Boulevard (see Figures 1
and 2 in the HPSR). The Neoclassical style open spandrel arch structure was built in 1914. It is
378 feet long and carries one lane of traffic in each direction with five-foot-wide sidewalks on
each side. Seismic analysis in 1990 and 1999 concluded that the bridge is deficient in strength
and is deteriorating (City of Pasadena 2005a). This Archaeological Survey Report (ASR),
prepared by Applied EarthWorks, Inc. (Æ), documents the methods and procedures of a cultural
resources survey of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for this project (see Figure 3 in the
HPSR) and an Extended Phase I survey of a site located within that APE.

In March 2004, the Æ cultural resources field survey resulted in the identification of one
historical site, 19-003346, within and north of the project APE. Site 19-003346 is located
adjacent to and north of La Loma Bridge, west of the channelized Arroyo Seco. The site consists
of a widespread deposit of locally darkened sediments containing historical artifacts. The
deposit is 380 feet north to south by 75 feet east to west and at least 4 feet deep. The site is
bounded by La Loma Bridge to the south, open parkland to the north, the base of a steep slope to
the west, and a pathway adjacent to the Arroyo Seco to the east. Materials found on the surface
and in shovel tests included abundant melted glass and slag, porcelain and whiteware fragments,
and various metal objects, including wire and washers. The deposit does not appear to be
eroding from the slope or from the street level above and is in situ. No similar deposits were
observed south of the bridge or on the east side of the Arroyo Seco.

Limited archival research to attempt to determine age and function of this historic-era site could
not conclusively determine site boundaries, association, or depositional date. Following
consultation with the City of Pasadena, Jones & Stokes, and Caltrans, an Extended Phase I
survey program was developed. A work plan was prepared submitted per Caltrans’ 2001
guidelines, and reviewed by Mr. Alex Kirkish of Caltrans. Extended Phase I field work took
place in April 2005.

The Æ Phase I cultural resources field survey was conducted on 26 March 2004. This pedestrian
field survey of the project APE was conducted by Ms. Nina Harris, R.P.A. (M.A., Archaeology,
1991, University of Durham), with 15 years of experience in California archaeology. The
Extended Phase I survey was implemented under the direction of Ms. M. Colleen Hamilton,
R.P.A. (M.A. History, 1990, University of Missouri, St. Louis, specializing in Historic
Archaeology), with 28 years of experience in history and historical archaeology. Archival
research, a subsequent site visit on 17 January 2005, and the Extended Phase I survey fieldwork
on 28 and 29 April 2005 were all conducted by Mr. Keith Warren of Æ (Suffolk Archaeological
Unit Field Schools, United Kingdom, 1987–89), with 11 years of experience in California
archaeology. Ms. Rachael Nixon of Æ (M.A. Public History, 2004, University of California,
Riverside), with 4 years of experience in California archaeology, assisted in the Extended Phase I
survey fieldwork and subsequent laboratory analysis of recovered artifacts.


                                                 1
                                     2.0
                          HIGHWAY PROJECT LOCATION
                               AND DESCRIPTION



2.1    PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Public Works Department in the City of Pasadena (City), in cooperation with Caltrans
(Caltrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing to rehabilitate or
replace the existing La Loma Road Bridge (Bridge #53C-0759) over the Arroyo Seco between
Arroyo Boulevard and Rockwood Road in the City of Pasadena, Los Angeles County. The 378-
foot long neoclassical reinforced concrete bridge was built in 1914 over the Arroyo Seco, a
major tributary to the Los Angeles River.

The current bridge carries two lanes of vehicular traffic, each 15-feet wide with five-foot wide
cantilevered sidewalks, one in each direction. Deteriorated bridge conditions include rusted
roadway expansion joints due to improper drainage, exposed reinforcing bars due to inadequate
concrete cover, and cracks and spalling throughout the bridge. The existing spandrel arch bridge
has two main spans and three approach spans supported on three piers and six rows of columns
in the Arroyo Seco.

The La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project will consist of improvements to the
existing bridge, or replacement of the bridge in the same location. The improvements are
designed to provide a safe bridge that meets current seismic standards. Three build alternatives
are under consideration; all three construction alternatives would entail some excavation,
grading, bridge construction, road paving, and miscellaneous finish work in the vicinity of the
existing bridge.

Alternative 1: Existing Bridge Retrofit and Rehabilitation Alternative
Retrofit describes the strengthening, reinforcement, and other activities necessary to enable the
bridge to withstand earthquake forces generally in accordance with current seismic design
standards. Rehabilitation includes aesthetic elements and repairs that would contribute to the
bridge’s overall appearance and function but are not required to ensure its seismic performance.
Both retrofit and rehabilitation address improvements that would be implemented to preserve and
continue to use substantial portions of the existing La Loma Road Bridge. This alternative is the
Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).

Alternative 2: Box-Girder Design Bridge Replacement Alternative
Replacement refers to options that would replace the existing bridge with an entirely new bridge
structure. In this alternative, a cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box girder would be
constructed. Architectural features can be included as rustication on the pier column faces and

                                                2
the exterior of the barrier railings, and in the shape of the exterior box girder web. A more
ornamental railing treatment could be developed for enhanced aesthetics.

Alternative 3: Open Concrete Arch Design Bridge Replacement Alternative
The proposed arch alternative would consist of three spans (of 110 feet, 155 feet, and 110 feet)
without pier or spandrel columns. In contrast to the original structure, this alternative would
feature a wide, single arch rib, supporting the superstructure at its vertex. This alternative would
be continuous from abutment to abutment. By using a transversely and longitudinally post-
tensioned concrete box girder, the superstructure would be light in weight and oblique in
appearance.




                                                 3
                                       3.0
                                SOURCES CONSULTED


3.1    INTRODUCTION

Sources consulted for these cultural investigations included the South Coastal Central
Archaeological Information Center at the California State University, Fullerton. Several libraries
and local historical societies were also consulted, which yielded information on the history of the
Project area. Native American groups and individuals were also contacted regarding their
knowledge of the Project area, and the area’s potential sensitivity for prehistoric resources and
sacred sites.


3.2    CULTURAL RESOURCES LITERATURE AND RECORDS SEARCH

Prior to the archaeological field investigation of the Project APE, a literature and records search
was conducted at the South Coastal Central Archaeological Information Center at the University
of California, Fullerton on March 5, 2004. The objective was to identify any previously recorded
cultural properties within a one-half mile radius of the Project APE. The records search
indicated that no surveys and/or archaeological excavations had been conducted in the vicinity of
the Project APE.

Sources consulted included a review of the National Register of Historic Places (1979, updated
annually); the California Points of Historical Interest (1992); the California State Historic
Resources Inventory database of the State Office of Historic Preservation (1976); the California
Register of Historic Places (2003); and the listing of California Historical Landmarks (1990).

One historic property is included on these various lists within the Project search area. The
Batchelder House, situated at 626 South Arroyo Boulevard, was constructed in 1910 and listed
on the NRHP in 1978.


3.3    ARCHIVAL RESEARCH

Other sources consulted for these cultural resources investigations included Sanborn Fire
Insurance maps on file at the Los Angles Public Library. Also, a limited examination of local
historical resources was undertaken at the Pasadena Public Library. These sources yielded
information on the history of the Project area.


3.4    NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION

A letter, dated 1 October 2003, including a map depicting the Project APE, was sent to the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requesting a review of the Sacred Lands file. The NAHC

                                                4
responded on 17 October 2003, indicating that there were no known sacred lands in the Project area.
The NAHC also provided a list of local Native American groups and contacts that may have an
interest in this project or knowledge of local resources. These individuals were notified of the
La Loma Bridge Rehabilitation/Replacement Project in March of 2004 (see HPSR). No
responses were received from this notification. The complete Native American correspondence is
presented in Appendix B.




                                                 5
                                           4.0
                                       BACKGROUND


4.1    INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the environmental and cultural setting of the general Project region to
provide a context for understanding the types, nature, and significance of the cultural resources
identified within the Project APE. Environmental data are derived from field observations and
background research. Only a brief summary of the prehistoric setting is provided, since no
prehistoric resources have been found in the Project APE.

4.2    ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The La Loma Bridge Project is situated within the Los Angeles Basin, a broad, level expanse of
land comprising more than 800 square miles that extends from Cahuenga Peak south to the
Pacific coast, and from Topanga Canyon southeast to the vicinity of Aliso Creek. Prior to
historical settlement of the area, the plain was characterized by extensive inland prairies and a
lengthy coastal strand, with elevations approximately 500 feet above mean sea level (amsl) or
less. The Los Angeles plain is traversed by several large watercourses, most notably the Los
Angeles, Rio Hondo, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana rivers. Marshlands fed by fresh or salt water
also once covered many portions of the area. To the west, the coastal region encompasses
approximately 375 square miles of varied terrain. West of Topanga Canyon the terrain is
rugged; the steep, westward slopes of the Santa Monica Mountains reach 1,000 feet or more in
elevation, except where stream-cut ravines and canyons drain onto narrow beaches at the water’s
edge. From Topanga Canyon southward to the Palos Verdes Peninsula, a distance of roughly 22
miles, the coast is flat and level; extensive marshlands once existed near the mouth of Ballona
Creek in the area now known as Playa del Rey. The terrain becomes rugged once again as the
coast follows the Palos Verdes Peninsula for a distance of approximately 12 miles before
reaching San Pedro Bay, which in prehistoric times was characterized by extensive mud flats and
sand bars (McCawley 1996:55–72).

The climate of this region is characterized by cool, moist winters and warm, dry summers, very
similar to the climate in countries adjacent to the Mediterranean Sea. During the twentieth
century, average annual precipitation has been less than 15 inches, although 40 inches of
precipitation annually is not unusual in the mountain regions. At times during the prehistoric
era, the land was likely well watered by the three major river systems and numerous tributaries,
many of which probably ran throughout the year. Prior to livestock ranching and urbanization,
there was likely much less runoff, resulting in a higher water table and more ground water.

At least eight biotic zones existed within the region prehistorically, including the valley
grassland, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, southern oak woodland, riparian woodland, freshwater
marsh, saltwater marsh, and the beach and coastal strip. The valley grassland and coastal sage-
scrub zones covered much of the open prairie of the Los Angeles plain and adjacent hill slopes.
Dominant plant species in these zones included rye grass, blue grass, bent grass, filaree, needle
grass, triple-awned grass, California buckwheat, coastal sage, encelia, yellow penstemon, mule
fat, bee plant, monkey flower, beavertail cactus, and jumping cholla cactus. Isolated stands of

                                                 6
yucca also were present. In the interior, the chaparral zone covered much of the higher hill
slopes surrounding the plain. Dominant shrubs included chamise, sugar bush, mountain
mahogany, black sage, and white sage. Clumped stands of scrub oak, interior live oak, and
holly-leaf cherry occurred sporadically within this community where water was more abundant.
Interspersed among these shrubs and trees was a wide variety of herbs including chia, onion,
nightshade, and silver buckwheat. Since historic times and the dramatic changes brought about
by urbanization, few remnants of the native biotic communities still exist within the Los Angeles
Basin (Goldberg et al. 1999).

Within the Lower Arroyo Seco, the canyon walls support primarily native and naturalized plant
species, which serve as habitat for a variety of bird, insect, and small mammal species. The
canyon floor has been artificially flattened by fill and grading, and is vegetated primarily with
non-native grasses. A concrete flood control channel runs through the entire length of the Lower
Arroyo Seco, dividing the canyon into east and west sides. Approximately 26 acres within the
Lower Arroyo Seco were recently restored with naturalized streambeds and native vegetation;
this area is currently characterized by active and passive recreation uses (City of Pasadena 2002)

4.3    PREHISTORY

Two regional chronologies are widely cited in the archaeological literature for the prehistory of
the coastal regions of southern California, that of Wallace (1955, 1978) and that of Warren
(1968). These chronologies are generalized temporal schemes based on the presence or absence
of certain artifact types; both chronologies span the known prehistoric occupation of coastal
southern California.

The 12,000–7500 B.P. Interval (Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene Period) is characterized by
an early hunting tradition that prevailed over a wide geographical area. Human populations,
apparently highly nomadic, responded to changing environmental conditions by focusing their
subsistence efforts on the procurement of a wide variety of faunal and floral resources.

The 7500 to 5000 B.P. Interval (Middle Holocene Period) is characterized by a generalized plant
collecting economy that was supplemented by hunting and fishing. This period, often called the
Millingstone Horizon, is marked by increased use of ground stone tools. Sites attributed to this
period appear to have been occupied by small groups of people at first; through time, populations
gradually grew and became more sedentary.

The 5000–1500 B.P. Interval (Middle to Late Holocene) is characterized by an increased reliance
on coastal resources, as well as a continued reliance on hunting and collecting. Additionally, the
advent of the bow and arrow and increased reliance on the mortar and pestle typify this period.
The subsistence base during this period broadened. The technological advancement of the
mortar and pestle indicate the use of acorns, an important storable subsistence resource.

The Post-1500 B.P. Interval (Late Holocene Period) is characterized by increasing cultural complexity
in both economic and social spheres. In general, occupation sites tend to be larger and contain a more
varied artifact assemblage; there also appears to have been more intensive exploitation of local
resources within the coastal, mountain, and interior environments. As well, social contacts and
economic influences were accelerated through trade, and political and ceremonial interactions.


                                                   7
4.4    ETHNOGRAPHY

The Project area is situated in a region that was inhabited by the Uto-Aztecan Gabrielino cultural
group. The Gabrielino are characterized as one of the most complex societies in native southern
California, second perhaps only to the Chumash, their coastal neighbors to the northwest, in
overall economic, ritual, and social organizational complexity (Bean and Smith 1978:538;
Kroeber 1925:621). The Gabrielino occupied a large territory, including the entire Los Angeles
Basin, the coast from Malibu to Aliso Creek, parts of the Santa Monica Mountains, the San
Fernando Valley, the San Gabriel Valley, the San Bernardino Valley, the northern part of the
Santa Ana Mountains, and much of the middle and lower Santa Ana River reaches. In addition,
the Gabrielino inhabited the islands of Santa Catalina, San Clemente, and San Nicolas. The
Gabrielino language was a Cupan language, part of the Takic family of the Uto-Aztecan
linguistic stock (Bean and Smith 1978:538). At the time of Spanish contact, the Gabrielino were
one of the wealthiest, most populous, and powerful ethnic nationalities in southern California,
and were credited with an elaborate material culture, expert craftsmanship in quarrying and
manufacturing steatite (soapstone) objects, and constructing plank canoes. For further
information regarding the Gabrielino, the reader is referred to Bean and Smith (1978), Kroeber
(1925), and McCawley (1996).

A Gabrielino village, Hahamogna, was present in Arroyo Seco near the Project area. With the
arrival of the Spaniards and the establishment of the San Gabriel Mission on September 8, 1771,
the Indians were subjugated, converted, and forced to labor for the mission (City of Pasadena
2005b)

4.5    HISTORY

This section provides a brief history of the Project area as it applies to the community of
Pasadena and La Loma Bridge.

4.5.1 Pasadena

In 1886 Pasadena incorporated, largely as a measure to rid the city of its saloons. In the ensuing
decade, amenities such as sewers, paved streets, and electric street lighting were installed. On
January 1, 1890, the Valley Hunt Club initiated a mid-winter festival with a procession of
flower-bedecked horses and carriages. This became a yearly tradition that in 1898 was formally
sponsored by the Tournament of Roses. An added tourist attraction was the Echo Mountain
incline railway, which opened in 1893 and included a mountain chalet resort and the Alpine
Tavern at Crystal Springs (City of Pasadena 2005b).

The cultural and educational side of the city was not neglected. The educational system
expanded in both the public and private sector. Throop Polytechnic Institute (first named Throop
University) was founded in 1891 and later became the California Institute of Technology.
Pasadena had a Shakespeare Club and Grand Opera House (never very successful) and numerous
civic and cultural organizations (City of Pasadena 2005b).

In the early 1900s more grand hotels were built. The city government was reorganized and in
1901, Pasadena became a charter city with an elected mayor. The city population grew from
9,117 in 1900 to 30,291 by 1910. The population included Chinese and Mexicans, who were
brought in to work on the railroads, and African Americans, who moved in and started small
                                                 8
businesses or worked as servants in the big houses and hotels. The area of the city increased
through annexations—first of sections to the north and east, then in 1914, San Rafael Heights
and Linda Vista, which had been physically linked to the city by the Colorado Street Bridge in
1913. Some of the best architects settled in Pasadena, which became known for its fine
architecture, particularly the Craftsman style, perfected by Greene and Greene (City of Pasadena
2005b).

Through the end of the 1920s, Pasadena continued to enjoy a reputation as a tourist center and
winter resort for the wealthy. The city had much to offer culturally. The Pasadena Community
Playhouse was incorporated in 1917 and moved to the new Pasadena Playhouse in 1925. A 100-
inch telescope was installed atop Mount Wilson under the direction of Dr. George Ellery Hale in
1917. The Pasadena City Junior College District was created in 1924. The Grace Nicholson
Gallery (which became the Pasadena Art Institute in 1943 and is now the Pacific Asia Museum
was completed in 1926 and the Pasadena Civic Symphony Orchestra and Civic Chorus was
founded by Tuesday Musicale in 1929. The city government, which changed to a Board of
Directors/City Manager structure in 1921, expanded municipal facilities. The Rose Bowl
stadium and Brookside Park recreation facilities were built. A 1923 city bond issue financed the
construction of a handsome Civic Center, consisting of the Central Library (opened on February
12, 1927), City Hall (opened on December 27, 1927) and the Civic Auditorium (which opened in
1932) (City of Pasadena 2005b).

The Depression signaled the end of an era for Pasadena, disrupting its tourist economy, which
never resumed at its previous level. The number of industrial establishments, which numbered
only 159 in 1929, decreased even further to 83 in 1933. In 1930, the city population was 76,086.
Ten years later it had increased by less than 8 percent to 81,864. Despite this, a 1939 study
conducted by Dr. Edward Thorndike of Columbia University on the general goodness of life in
U.S. cities rated Pasadena as the best city of all in which to live (City of Pasadena 2005b).
World War II ushered in a turnabout, and set Pasadena on the path to modern industrial growth.
During the war, hotels in Pasadena were used as military command headquarters. The Vista del
Arroyo Hotel was purchased by the Army and became a convalescent hospital for the wounded.
Led by Caltech and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which became focal points of research and
development for the war effort, Pasadena evolved into a center for industrial research and light
manufacture of scientific and electronic precision instruments. By 1954, there were 394
industrial establishments in Pasadena (City of Pasadena 2005b).

The completion in 1940 of the Arroyo Seco Parkway, the first freeway in the west, provided a
fast and direct route from Pasadena to Los Angeles. Pasadena became an attractive place to live
for people working in industrial areas in Los Angeles. In the postwar boom, newcomers flocked
to Pasadena (City of Pasadena 2005b).

4.5.2 La Loma Bridge

Sanborn maps from 1903, 1910, 1931, and 1951 do not depict the west side of the bridge. The
1910 map describes an earlier bridge at the La Loma location as “wagon bridge” (Figure 1).
Other documents on file at the Pasadena Public Library indicate that the area adjacent to the
bridge and west of the Arroyo Seco was once part of the San Rafael Ranch. Much of the ranch
was operational until sometime in the 1920s. Three bridges may have existed at or near the


                                               9
Figure 1: 1910 Sanborn Map Depicting the Project Area




                                                    10
present location. Donald W. Crocker suggests that the first bridge was erected following a
subdivision of parts of the ranch in 1888. The bridge was opened in 1898 and a toll was paid on
the east side. This bridge was apparently replaced by a wooden and steel bridge free to the
public and constructed by city and county funds (Crocker 1968:30, 34). Bridges at this location
were known as the California Street Bridge or the Huntington Street Bridge. The Pasadena Star
of January 27, 1914 carries a story regarding the contract for the construction of the current
bridge. It was to be built by Munoz & Munoz at a cost of $46,466 and was designed by Ivory B.
Noble. The bridge is referred to as the California Street Bridge. It is not known at this stage
when the bridge became known as the La Loma Bridge.

4.5.3 Arroyo Seco Channelization

Efforts to alleviate the problem of persistent and destructive floods in the Arroyo Seco began in
the 1900s. In 1914, following a flood that claimed 10 bridges, 30 homes, and 43 lives,
floodwalls were constructed by Los Angeles in the Avenue 35 area (Brick 2005). In 1915, the
Los Angeles County Flood Control District was created and, following an easement allowed by
the City of Pasadena, the Devils Gate Dam was built. The dam was dedicated in 1920 (Brick
2005). Channelization of the Arroyo Seco began in the 1930s. This occurred as part of a Clean
Water Act/ State Emergency Relief Administration/Works Project Administration project. A
flood in March of 1938 caused extensive damages and claimed over 170 lives and emphasized
the need for the completion of the channelization project. Work continued and the section of the
arroyo between the Colorado Street Bridge and the La Loma Bridge was channelized in 1947.
The work was undertaken by A. Teichert & Son, Inc, and was completed in December of 1947 at
a cost of $420,000 (Brick 2005). The section from La Loma Street to San Pasqual Street was
channelized in 1948, completing the 6.6-mile stretch from the Colorado Street Bridge to the Los
Angeles River.




                                               11
                                            5.0
                                      FIELD METHODS


The La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project APE is located along the north and
south sides of the bridge. Nina Harris of Æ conducted a pedestrian field survey of the Project
APE on 26 March 2004. Much of the ground surface is obscured by vegetation, including brush
and large trees. Steep slopes, the bridge abutments themselves, and the fenced channel of the
Arroyo Seco limit access to portions of the Project area. However, as feasible, transects at
roughly 10 to 15-meter intervals were walked throughout the Project APE on both sides of the
Arroyo Seco Channel. This survey resulted in the identification of dark soils and scattered
historical artifacts on the west side of the Arroyo, adjacent to and north of La Loma Bridge. This
site was assigned the temporary designation Æ-LLB-1.

A subsequent site visit was undertaken on 17 January by Keith Warren of Æ. Locally darkened
soils and historical artifacts were again observed. Subsequently, after consultation with the City
of Pasadena, Jones & Stokes, and Caltrans, an Extended Phase I survey program was developed.
This work plan was prepared and submitted per Caltrans’ 2001 guidelines. The Extended Phase
I was designed to investigate the site’s depositional characteristics archaeological data potential.
It included shovel testing, surface definition of site boundaries, and limited artifact evaluation.
Following Caltrans review and approval of the Extended Phase I survey plan, fieldwork was
undertaken by Keith Warren and Rachael Nixon of Æ on April 28 and 29, 2005.

The objectives of the fieldwork were to determine site boundaries, site integrity, and, if possible,
date of deposition and historical association. Eight 50-centimeter diameter shovel test pits were
manually excavated. Four test pits were placed within the APE to determine the level of
construction impacts and four test pits were excavated beyond the APE as a method of
determining site boundaries and depth of deposit. Each test pit was excavated in 20-centimeter
levels and the sediments passed through ¼ inch wire mesh. Artifact frequency and soil
characteristics were noted on field forms. All diagnostics elements were collected, while other
items were noted and discarded. Once completed, the test pits were immediately backfilled. A
detailed map of the site was drawn, GPS data were collected, and diagnostic artifacts were
collected from the surface. All field notes, photographs, and data collected as part of this Project
are housed at the offices of Applied EarthWorks Inc., in Hemet, California. Primary and
archaeological site records were then completed and submitted to the South Coastal Central
Archaeological Information Center at California State University, Fullerton (Appendix A).




                                                 12
                                     6.0
                       STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS


6.1     INTRODUCTION

One newly discovered historical archaeological resource, 19-003346, was documented in the La
Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project APE as a result of this archaeological survey
and Extended Phase I survey. A description of the newly discovered site is provided below; a
preliminary significance evaluation of this resource is offered in Section 6.3. Conclusions are
offered in Section 6.4. The archaeological site record for site 19-003346 is presented in
Appendix A.

6.2     SITE 19-003346

Site 19-003346 is located adjacent to and north of La Loma Bridge, west of the channelized Arroyo
Seco. The site consists of a widespread deposit of locally darkened sediments containing historical
artifacts. The deposit is 380 feet north to south by 75 feet east to west and at least 4 feet deep. It is
visible on the surface (Figure 2.) The site is bounded by La Loma Bridge to the south, open parkland
to the north, the base of a steep slope to the west, and a pathway adjacent to the Arroyo Seco to the
east (Figure 3). Materials found on the surface and in shovel tests included abundant melted glass
and slag, porcelain and whiteware fragments, and various metal objects, including wire and washers
(See Appendix C for a complete list of artifacts recovered from each shovel test). The deposit does
not appear to be eroding from the slope or from the street level above and is in situ. No similar
deposits were observed south of the bridge or on the east side of the Arroyo Seco.
Figure 2: Overview of Site 19-003346




                                                   13
Figure 3: Map of Site 19-003346




                                  14
Shovel tests within the APE were excavated to depths of between 30 and 80 centimeters. Bedrock
was encountered at 30 centimeters in test pit 4. Test pits 1, 2, and 3 contained small fragments of
glass, ceramics, slag, and metal, and were excavated up to 80 centimeters (Table 1). The sediments
in these test pits included intrusive brown loam and sand mixed with the darkened soil that contains
historical material. In texture, these are the same type of sediments as found within the intact portion
of the site outside the APE but they have been disturbed and/or re-deposited. For example, in test pit
1 intrusive clear glass and rubber was found in the upper 40 cm, while test pits 3 and 4 contained
coarse gravel and modern bottles and cans mixed with the historical debris found elsewhere (see
Table 1).

 Table 1: Summary of Shovel Test Characteristics

 Shovel                  Location                      Dimensions                    Description
 Test #
   1      Within APE, beyond site boundaries.    50 x 80 cm deep.         Mixed brown sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels. Clear glass and rubber in
                                                                          upper 40 cm. No Cultural
                                                                          material 40-80 cm.
   2      Within APE. South end of site.         50 x 80 cm deep.         Mixed brown sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels, lenses of dark sandy
                                                                          loam. Metal, slag, glass, cobbles.
                                                                          Terminated at 80 cm due to
                                                                          presence of large cobbles.
   3      Within APE. South end of site.         50 x 80 cm deep.         Mixed brown sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels, lenses of dark sandy loam.
                                                                          Modern cans, bottles in upper
                                                                          20cm. Metal, charcoal, slag, glass,
                                                                          cobbles. Terminated at 80 cm due
                                                                          to presence of large cobbles.
   4      Within APE. South end of site.         50 x 40 cm deep.         Mixed brown sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels, lenses of dark sandy
                                                                          loam. Modern cans, bottles in
                                                                          upper 20cm. Metal, charcoal, slag,
                                                                          glass, cobbles. Terminated at 40
                                                                          cm due to contact with bedrock.
   5      Beyond APE. South end of site.         50 x 90 cm deep.         Dark gray sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels. Abundant slag and
                                                                          melted glass. Metal, charcoal,
                                                                          ceramics. Terminated at 90 cm
                                                                          due to contact with bedrock.
   6      Beyond APE. Center of site.            50 x 120 cm deep.        Dark gray sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels. Abundant slag and
                                                                          melted glass. Metal, charcoal,
                                                                          ceramics. Terminated at 120 cm
                                                                          due to depth.
   7      Beyond APE. North end of site.         50 cm x 40 cm deep.      Dark gray sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels. Abundant slag and melted
                                                                          glass. Metal, charcoal, ceramics.
                                                                          Terminated at 40 cm due to contact
                                                                          with recycled water pipeline.
   8      Beyond APE. North end of site.         50 cm x 40 cm deep.      Dark gray sandy loams and
                                                                          gravels. Abundant slag and
                                                                          melted glass. Metal, charcoal,
                                                                          ceramics. Terminated at 70 cm
                                                                          due to contact with bedrock.

                                                  15
A 9-inch ceramic pipe was visible at the surface within the APE. The installation of this pipeline has
caused localized disturbance on this portion of the site (within the APE). It appears to have cut
through the darkened cultural horizon. In comparison to the sediments found outside the APE, the
darkened cultural horizon retained little integrity.

Shovel tests beyond the APE were excavated to between 40 and 120 centimeters. Test pit 7 was
abandoned at 40 centimeters due to contact with a PVC recycled water pipeline. In test pit 8,
bedrock was encountered at 70 centimeters, and in test pit 5 bedrock was encountered at 90
centimeters. Test pit 6, approximately in the center in the deposit was excavated to 120 centimeters.
The bottom of the deposit was not reached. The deposit extends beyond the depth possible for
controlled manual excavation in a shovel probe.

All of the test pits beyond the APE contained abundant melted glass and slag fragments as well as
small quantities of ceramics and metal. Sediments in this area consist of black loamy sand with
inclusions of charcoal (Figure 4). The deposit is loosely compacted and, with the exception of test
pit 6 is uniformly stratified. In test pit 6, a 20-centimeter thick layer of compacted light brown sands
was discovered at 30 centimeters below the current surface. The historical deposit continued below
the sand. The sandy layer contained no artifacts and the exact nature of this deposit is unknown.

A small number of diagnostic items were collected and transported to the Æ laboratory in Hemet for
analysis. These include crown caps (1892+), wire nails (1890+), and yellowware fragments (1830+).
Other items collected include hand-painted whiteware fragments, battery and light bulb parts, a
standing pig figurine (Figure 5), and a “phoenix” pattern Chinese porcelain bowl base. The large
quantity of melted glass and slag observed suggests that the area was utilized for industrial purposes.
Nonetheless, the deposit contains domestic material of unknown origin. It is possible that refuse was
burned as fuel for equipment used during bridge or channel construction. Some 1940s and 1950s
material was also found in the upper 40 centimeters, which may have been introduced by rodent
activity. Analysis of the collected items offers little further insight to site usage or deposition date.

Figure 4: Detail of Sediments, Site 19-003346




                                                   16
Figure 5: Pig Figurine Recovered from 19-003346




Artifacts collected from Site 19-003346 during the current work are under consideration for
curation at the Fowler Museum at UCLA. Arrangements have not yet been finalized for
curation as of the date of this report, July 2005.


6.3    PRELIMINARY SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION

As recorded, Site 19-003346 consists of a deposit of locally darkened soils containing historical
artifacts, predominantly waste and thermally altered material, such as melted glass and slag.
Domestic refuse, however, was also present. The deposit appears to be associated with
construction of the existing bridge (1914), Arroyo Seco channelization (1947), or habitation site
of unknown association. Based on what is visible on the surface and limited shovel test results, a
full interpretation cannot be offered at this stage.

Currently, the proposed APE extends 20 feet north of the bridge. Within the APE the deposit
has been disturbed, deflated, and retains little integrity. Beyond the APE, the deposit is lightly
disturbed by installation of irrigation trenches, but generally retains very good integrity.

Overall, the integrity at Site 19-003346 is good. Further, the potential to recover below ground
archaeological data that could yield information important in industry or technology appears to
be equally good. However, only additional Phase II testing can provide the information required
for significance assessment and accurate site interpretation. Site 19-003346 appears to be
potentially eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D or for the CRHR under Criterion 4.
Nonetheless, because of extensive prior disturbance of the deposits within the APE, this portion
of the site lacks integrity and cannot contribute significant historical, archaeological data.




                                                 17
6.4 CONCLUSIONS

Construction associated with the La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project may
include grading and possibly removal of some or all of the bridges structural elements. Because
the portions of this site within the APE retain little integrity, and have little archaeological
potential, the project can proceed without adverse effect to this potentially historic property.
However, the site outside the APE retains integrity, and the cultural deposit is visible at the
surface. To protect the site area outside of the APE from inadvertent damage, temporary
construction fencing should be erected to surround this portion of the site during construction.
Vehicle or pedestrian access within this fenced area by all personnel should be prohibited during
construction.

However, if unanticipated buried archaeological deposits are revealed during below ground
disturbance within the APE, work in the area of the discovery must halt until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the find. It is Caltrans’ policy to avoid
impacts to cultural resources whenever possible (Environmental Handbook, Vol. 2, Chap. 1).
If construction plans require below ground disturbances beyond the proposed APE, further
evaluation and, possibly, mitigation measures may be required.

If human remains are exposed during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary
findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. Construction
must halt in the area of the discovery of human remains, the area must be protected, and
consultation and treatment should occur as prescribed by law.




                                                 18
                                          7.0
                                      REFERENCES

Bean, John Lowell, and Charles R. Smith
   1978 Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8. Smithsonian
          Institute, Washington.

Brick, Tim
   2005 Arroyo Seco Flood Timeline. Available:
   <http://www.arroyoseco.org/history.htm>. Web site accessed May 5, 2005.

City of Pasadena
    2005a La Loma Bridge Project. Available:
           <http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/publicworks/engineering/lalomabridge/>. Web site
           accessed May 6, 2005.

   2005b Heritage. A Short History of Pasadena. Available:
         <http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/History/default.asp.> Web site accessed May 9, 2005.

   2002    Arroyo Seco Master Plan EIR. Available:
           <http://www.ci.pasadena.ca.us/arroyoSeco.asp.> Web site accessed May 6, 2005.

Crocker Donald W.
   1968    Within the Vale of Annadale. A Picture History of South Western Pasadena and
           Vicinity. Donald.W. Crocker. Pasadena, California.

Goldberg, S. K., B. J. Adams, C. Denardo, S. A. Williams, M. J. Wyss, M. C. Robinson,
S. L. Martin, M. S. Shackley, T. M. Oringer, J. L. McVicar, and Beta Analytic, Inc.
    1999 The People of Yaanga?: Archaeological Investigations at CA-LAN-1575/H. The
           Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Headquarters Facility Project
           Submitted to Union Station Partners on behalf of the Metropolitan Water District of
           Southern California, Los Angeles, California.

Jones & Stokes
   2005 La Loma Bridge Rehabilitation Replacement Project. Draft Environmental Impact
          Report/ Environmental Assessment. State Clearinghouse No. 200310150. Prepared
          for the Federal Highway Administration, California Department of Transportation,
          and the City of Pasadena.

Kroeber, Alfred L.
   1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.
          Washington.

McCawley, William
  1996 The First Angelinos, the Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum
        Press/Ballena Press.


                                               19
Sanborn Map Co.
   1903 Insurance Maps of Pasadena, California. Sanborn Map Company, Pelham, NY.
         (Web site and microfilm copies at Los Angeles Public Library.)

   1910   Insurance Maps of Pasadena, California. Sanborn Map Company, Pelham, NY.
          (Web site and microfilm copies at Los Angeles Public Library.)

   1931   Insurance Maps of Pasadena, California. Sanborn Map Company, Pelham, NY.
          (Web site and microfilm copies at Los Angeles Public Library.)

   1951   Insurance Maps of Pasadena, California. Sanborn Map Company, Pelham, NY.
          (Web site and microfilm copies at Los Angeles Public Library.)

Wallace, William J.
  1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern
          Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214-230.

   1978   Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 B.C. In California, edited by R. F.
          Heizer, pp. 25–36. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant,
          general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Warren, Claude N.
  1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast.
          Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1-14.




                                            20
        APPENDIX A

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD
State of California — The Resources Agency                                           Primary #          19-003346
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION                                                   HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD                                                                       Trinomial    CA-LAN-3346
                                                                                     NRHP Status Code
                                 Other Listings
                          Review Code                            Reviewer                               Date
                                              Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) Æ-LLB-1H
Page 1 of 7

P1.    Other Identifier:
P2.    Location: a. County Los Angeles, California                    : Not for publication         9 Unrestricted
       b. USGS 7.5' Quad Pasadena, California                                            Date 1995
                         T. 1N R. 12W           ¼ of          ¼ of        Sec. Unsectioned
       c. Address:        La Loma Street             City Pasadena                   Zip      90054
       d. Zone              0392438         mE/     3777492 mN.
       e. Other Locational Data (e.g., parcel #, legal description, directions to resource, additional UTMs, etc.,
       when appropriate): The site is located adjacent to and immediately north of the La Loma Road bridge in the City of
       Pasadena, and west of the channelized Arroyo Seco, in Lower Arroyo Park. Vehicular access is obtained through the
       City of Pasadena Department of Public Works. From Arroyo Boulevard turn into the park at the Archery Range, cross
       the bridge and turn left to the La Loma Bridge. Pedestrian access is available from a variety of pathways and trails into
       the park.

P3a.   Description (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size,
       setting, and boundaries): The site consists of a widespread deposit of locally darkened sediments containing historical
       artifacts. The deposit is 380 x 75 feet, and at least 4 feet deep and is visible on the surface. It is bounded by the La Loma Bridge
       to the south, open park land to the north, the base of a steep slope to the west, and a pathway adjacent to the Arroyo Seco to the
       east. Materials include melted glass, slag, porcelain and whiteware fragments and various metal objects. The deposit does not
       appear to be eroding from the slope or from the street level above. All indications are that the deposit is in situ. No similar
       deposits were observed south of the bridge or on the east side of the Arroyo Seco.

       On April 28 and 29, 2005 Applied Earthworks Inc. conducted limited archaeological testing of the site in advance of the
       La Loma Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project proposed by the City of Pasadena, the California Department of
       Transportation (Caltrans), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Eight shovel test pits were excavated, a
       surface collection of diagnostic artifacts was undertaken, and the site was mapped in detail. Currently, the proposed Area
       of Potential Effects (APE) extends 20 feet north of the bridge. Within the APE the deposit has been disturbed and retains
       little integrity. Beyond the APE the deposit is lightly disturbed by installation of an irrigation system, but generally
       retains very good integrity.

       The deposit is thought to be associated with bridge construction or arroyo channelization. Sanborn maps from 1903,
       1910, 1931, and 1951 do not depict the west side of the bridge. The 1910 map describes an earlier bridge at the La Loma
       location as a “wagon bridge.” Other documents on file at the Pasadena Public Library indicate that the area adjacent to
       the bridge and west of the Arroyo Seco was once part of the San Rafael Ranch. Much of the ranch was operational until
       sometime in the 1920s. Three bridges may have existed at or near the present location. Donald W. Crocker suggests that
       the first bridge was erected following a subdivision of parts of the ranch in 1888. The bridge was opened in 1898 and a
       toll was paid on the east side. This bridge was apparently replaced by a wood and steel bridge free to the public and
       constructed by city and county funds (Crocker 1968:30, 34). Bridges at this location were known as the California Street
       Bridge or the Huntington Street Bridge. The Pasadena Star of January 27, 1914 carries a story regarding the contract for
       the construction of the current bridge. It was to be built by Munoz & Munoz at a cost of $46,466 and was designed by
       Ivory B. Noble. The bridge is referred to as the California Street Bridge. It is not known at this stage when the bridge
       became known as the La Loma Bridge. The section of the arroyo between the Colorado Street bridge and the La Loma
       bridge was channelized in 1947 (Brick 2005)

P3b.   Resource Attributes (List attributes and codes): AH4: Historical Refuse Deposit.

P4.    Resources Present: 9 Building 9 Structure 9 Object : Site                     9 District   9 Element of district

P5.    Photograph or Drawing: (Photograph required for buildings, structures, and objects.)

P6.    Date Constructed/Age and Source:                9 Prehistoric : Historic 9 Both


                                                                 A-1
State of California — The Resources Agency                                    Primary #        19-003346
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION                                            HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD                                                       Trinomial     CA-LAN-3346
                                                                     NRHP Status Code
                                 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) Æ-LLB-1H
Page 2 of 7

P7.    Owner and Address: City of Pasadena. 117 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, CA 91105.

P8.    Recorded by (Name, affiliation, address): Keith Warren, Applied EarthWorks, Inc. 3292 E. Florida Avenue, Suite
       A, Hemet, CA 92544

P9.    Date Recorded:: May 23, 2005

P10.   Type of Survey: : Intensive                Reconnaissance             Other
       The historical feature was discovered during survey and further assessed through Extended Phase I testing.

P11.   Report Citation (Provide full citation or enter “none”):


Attachments: 9 None : Archaeological Record 9 Continuation Sheet 9 Artifact Record 9 District Record                9
Linear Resource Record 9 Rock Art Record 9 Milling Station Record : Photograph Record
: Site Map Sheet : Location Map Sheet 9 Other (List):




                                                            A-2
State of California — The Resources Agency                                       Primary #         19-003346
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION                                               Trinomial         CA-LAN-3346
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD
Page 3 of 7                                 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder)     Æ-LLB-1H

A1.    Dimensions: a. 380 ft (N-S) Length  x b. 75 ft (E-W) Width
       Method of Measurement: 9 Paced : Taped 9 Visual estimate 9 Other:

       Method of Determination (Check any that apply): 9 Artifacts              9 Features : Soil 9 Vegetation
       9 Topography 9 Cut bank 9 Animal burrow 9 Excavation                     Property boundary 9 Other (explain):

       Reliability of Determination:        : High      9 Medium       9 Low     Explain: Feature is visible on the surface.

       Limitations (Check any that apply): 9 Restricted access       Paved/built over : Disturbances
       9 Site limits incompletely defined : Other (Explain): Dense vegetation.

A2.    Depth: Three to at least four feet    9 None     9 Unknown Method of Determination: Archaeological testing.

A3.    Human Remains: 9 Present             : Absent    9 Possible 9 Unknown (Explain): None observed.

A4.    Features (Number, briefly describe, indicate size, list associated cultural constituents, and show location of
       each feature on sketch map): A large deposit of locally darkened soils containing historical materials. The deposit is
       visible on the surface and measures 380 x 75 feet. It is at least four feet deep in places. A total of eight shovel test pits
       revealed that the deposit contains abundant melted glass fragments and slag fragments. Also observed were small
       fragments of porcelain and whiteware, metal objects including copper wire and washers, and brick and mortar fragments.

        No evidence of prehistoric or protohistoric occupation was discovered.

A5.    Cultural Constituents (Describe and quantify artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues, etc., not associated with
       Features): None.

A6.    Were Specimens Collected? 9 No           :Yes (If yes, attach Artifact Record or catalog and identify where
       specimens are curated.) Artifacts are curated at the Applied EarthWorks Inc. Hemet laboratory.

A7.    Site Condition: : Good              Fair 9 Poor (Describe disturbances): Disturbances within the proposed APE
       (20 feet north of bridge) included an exposed ceramic pipeline. Beyond the APE at least two PVC pipelines, for an
       irrigation line run north-south through the deposit. Intensive rodent activity is present throughout the site area.

A8.    Nearest Water (Type, distance, and direction): The channelized Arroyo Seco is 20 feet to the east.

A9.    Elevation:    678 ft amsl.

A10.   Environmental Setting (Describe vegetation, fauna, soils, geology, landform, slope, aspect, exposure, etc.,
       as appropriate): The deposit is at the base of an east facing granite slope of approximately 30–45 degrees. The deposit
       itself is on a flat area of decomposing granite bedrock. The slope and the deposit are covered by dense and varied
       vegetation that includes oak, poison oak, palms, sycamore, ivy, bougainvillea, foxtails and other grasses. Rodent burrows
       are abundant.

A11.   Historical Information (Note sources and provide full citations in Field A15 below): Sanborn Maps, 1903,
       1910, 1931 and 1951. Crocker 1969, Brick 2005.

A12.   Age: 9 Prehistoric 9 Pre-Colonial (1500–1769) 9 Spanish/Mexican (1769–1848) 9 Early American
       (1848–1880) 9 Turn of century (1880–1914) : Early 20th century (1914–1945)
       9 Post WWII (1945+) 9 Undetermined              Factual or estimated dates of occupation (explain): Dates are based on
       historical documents and preliminary analysis of diagnostic artifacts.




                                                              A-3
State of California — The Resources Agency                                     Primary #          19-003346
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION                                             Trinomial          CA-LAN-3346
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD
Page 4 of 7                                *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder)     Æ-LLB-1H

A13.   Interpretations (Discuss scientific, interpretive, ethnic, and other values of site, if known):
       The deposit is thought to be associated with bridge construction or arroyo channelization. Sanborn maps from 1903,
       1910, 1931, and 1951 do not depict the west side of the bridge. The 1910 map describes an earlier bridge at the La Loma
       location as “wagon bridge.” Other documents on file at the Pasadena Public Library indicate that the area adjacent to the
       bridge and west of the Arroyo Seco was once part of the San Rafael Ranch. Much of the ranch was operational until
       sometime in the 1920s. Three bridges may have existed at or near the present location. Donald W. Crocker suggests that
       the first bridge was erected following a subdivision of parts of the ranch in 1888. The bridge was opened in 1898 and a
       toll was paid on the east side. This bridge was apparently replaced by a wooden and steel bridge free to the public and
       constructed by city and county funds (Crocker 1968:30, 34). Bridges at this location were known as the California Street
       Bridge or the Huntington Street Bridge. The Pasadena Star of January 27, 1914 carries a story regarding the contract for
       the construction of the current bridge. It was to be built by Munoz & Munoz at a cost of $46,466 and was designed by
       Ivory B. Noble. The bridge is referred to as the California Street Bridge. It is not known at this stage when the bridge
       became known as the La Loma Bridge. The section of the arroyo between the Colorado Street bridge and the La Loma
       bridge was channelized in 1947 (Brick 2005). The flat area north of the bridge where the deposit exists may have been
       used as a bridge or channel construction staging area.

       A small quantity of diagnostic artifacts were collected from the surface and shovel tests. These artifacts include crown
       caps (1892+), wire nails (1890+), and yellowware fragments (1830+). 1940s and 1950s material was also found in the
       upper 40 centimeters, which may have been introduced by rodent activity. Analysis of these items offers little further
       insight in to site usage or deposition date.

A14.   Remarks: An archaeological survey report for Caltrans will be produced.

A15.   References (Give full citations including the names and address of any persons interviewed, if possible):
       Crocker Donald W.
           1968   Within the Vale of Annadale. A Picture History of South Western Pasadena and Vicinity. Donald.W.
                  Crocker. Pasadena, California.
       Brick, Tim
           2005   Arroyo Seco Flood Timeline. < http://www.arroyoseco.org/history.htm > Website accessed May 5 2005.

       Sanborn Fire Insurance Company. (On file at Los Angeles Public Library)

A16.   Photographs (List subjects, direction of view, and accession numbers or attach a Photograph Record):
       All photographs documenting the archaeological survey are currently being housed at the Applied EarthWorks Inc.,
       Hemet laboratory.

A17.   Form Prepared by: K. Warren                                              Date: 5/23/05
        Affiliation and Address: Applied EarthWorks, Inc, 3292 E. Florida Ave, Suite A, Hemet, CA 92544.




                                                             A-4
State of California — The Resources Agency                                     Primary #   19-003346
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION                                             Trinomial   CA-LAN-3346
PHOTOGRAPH RECORD
Page 5 of 7                     *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder)     Æ-LLB-1H

Temporary Number/Resource Name:
Project Name: La Loma Bridge                              Photographer: N. Harris
Image Type: 9 (bw) 35mm B&W film 9 (cp) 35mm Color Print film        (cs) 35mm Color Slide film
             9 (df) Digital-Floppy disk (dm) Digital-Memory flash card
Camera Type and Model:
Film Type and Speed: 35 mm color print                           Roll Number: LLB-NH-1-cp
Year: 2004
                        Exp./                                                              View
 Mo.     Day     Time   Frame      Subject/Description                                     Toward   Accession #

 3       26      1315   7A         Overview of site from bridge.                           N

 3       26             8A         Eastside overview.                                      N

 3       26             9A         Eastside overview                                       S

 3       26             10A        Whiteware fragment in dark soil south of bridge.        N/A

 3       26             11A        Artifacts in path.                                      N

 3       26             12A        Pipes exposed in site.                                  NW

 3       26             13A        Soil and artifacts.                                     N/A

 3       26             14A        Overview.                                               S

 3       26             15A        Pillars/pedestals beneath bridge, west side.            NW

 3       26             16A        Pillars/pedestals beneath bridge, west side.            N

 3       26             17A        Soil and artifacts in rodent disturbance.               N/A

 3       26             18A        Bridge.                                                 NE

 3       26             19A        Bridge/fence/channel.                                   N

 3       26             20A        Small concrete structure south side of bridge.          W

 3       26             21A        Drainage south side of bridge.                          NW

 3       26             22A        Willowware fragment south side of bridge.               N/A

 3       26             23A        Flora below bridge.                                     NE

 3       26             24A        Flora below bridge.                                     NE

 3       26             25         Flora below bridge south side.                          NE




                                                            A-5
A-6
A-7
          APPENDIX B

NATIVE AMERICAN CORRESPONDENCE
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
        APPENDIX C

LIST OF ARTIFACTS RECOVERED
                                           Appendix C
                      List of Artifacts Recovered during Extended Phase I
                     Site 19-003346, La Loma Bridge, Pasadena, California
Test
Unit      Depth       Artifact Description
Surface   Surface     1 small clear glass light bulb
                      1 milk glass globe/shade body fragment—molded wide ribs
                      1 clear glass tube/connector
                      1 clear glass bottle base—“…QUART 4/5…// 1725…/MG(slanted)…/6” — ca. 1958
                      1 porcelain body/base fragment—single green body band
                      1 stoneware (yellowware?) rim fragment
                      1 whiteware body fragment—pink tulip pattern—transfer print—popular 1830
                      1 whiteware cup rim—multicolor floral pattern inside, small horizontal ribbing
                        outside, scalloped edge, decal with handpainting—popular 1880–1920
                      1 whiteware leaf dish fragment—mint green glaze, fluted edge—“SW…” carved into
                        base, possibly hand made

SHP 1     0–20 cm     3 green bottle glass body; “. . . 1/2. . .”
                      1 milk glass fragment
                      1 porcelain rim and body fragment
                      1 concrete piece
          20–30 cm    1 milk glass fragment
                      4 light aqua glass body fragments
                      1 light aqua glass crown finish—Pat. 1892–P
                      2 wood fragments
                      2 charcoal fragments
                      1 U-shaped metal rod
                      4 hard rubber fragments

SHP 2     20–40 cm    1 milk glass body fragment
                      1 yellowware body fragment—ca. 1830–1940
                      1 metal crown cap—Pat. 1892–P
                      1 metal thin rod/wire
          40–60 cm    3 pieces slag
                      1 brown glass body fragment
                      1 clear glass body fragment—painted label “. . .r” in red with white and blue
                        background
          60–80 cm    10 pieces of slag
                      2 small wire nails—Post 1890/95
                      2 brown glass body fragments
                      3 milk glass fragments
                      1 clear glass bottle base fragment
                      2 clear glass body fragments (crazed)

SHP 4     0–20 cm     1 brown bottle base—“. . .48 (in box) / . . .5 (in box)”
                      1 clear bottle body fragment
                      2 brown bottle body (crazed)
                      1 clear body fragment—crosshatch decoration (crazed)
                      1 clear body fragment (melted)
                      1 porcelain quarter round tile?—undecorated
                      1 porcelain rim fragment—undecorated
          20–40 cm    1 piece charcoal
                      7 pieces slag
                      1 metal hunk
                      1 metal cap?
                      1 olive glass body fragment
                      3 clear glass body fragments
                      1 brown glass body fragment
                                                 C-1
Test
Unit    Depth      Artifact Description
                   1 green glass body fragment
                   1 aqua glass body fragment
                   3 milk glass body fragments
                   1 clear glass body fragment—“. . .4/5 PINT. . .”
                   1 porcelain base—undecorated
                   1 whiteware base—undecorated
                   1 porcelain rim—undecorated
                   1 yellowware rim—4 cranberry rim bands, annularware—1830–1900

SHP 5   0–20 cm    15 pieces slag
                   1 organic bean
                   1 small bundle thin wire
                   1 terra cotta flowerpot rim
                   1 porcelain body fragment—undecorated
                   1 whitewware rim fragment—shell edge
                   1 whiteware base fragment—undecorated
                   1 porcelain body—unique etched pattern
                   1 ceramic rim and base fragment—melted
                   2 ceramic body fragments—blue/white glaze—melted
                   1 ceramic rim and body fragment
                   1 dark amethyst light bulb base—ca. 1880–1918
                   1 cobalt glass threaded finish fragment
                   1 aqua glass threaded finish fragment
                   2 clear glass threaded finish fragments
                   1 clear glass crown finish fragment—Pat. 1892–P
                   1 brown glass double ring? finish fragment
                   1 green glass bottle base “I (in oval)”—since 1954
                   1 green glass bottle base “D (script)…”—Duraglas, since 1940
                   2 brown glass base fragments
                   4 brown glass body fragments
                   4 clear glass base fragments
                   2 clear glass body fragments
                   2 green glass body fragments
                   1 aqua glass body fragment
                   2 blue thin glass fragments globe/shade?
        20–40 cm   3 pieces slag
                   2 large spikes
                   1 medium wire nail—Post 1890/95
                   2 aluminum caps/seals
                   3 wires, various sizes
                   1 hard rubber fragment
                   1 whiteware body fragment—mint green glaze
                   3 ceramic flesh colored rim and body fragments
                   1 porcelain rim fragment—undecorated
                   1 clear glass marble—red swirl
                   1 light blue glass fragment
                   6 brown glass body fragments (melted)
                   2 green glass body fragments (melted)
                   1 aqua glass body fragment (melted)
                   1 milk glass body fragment (melted)
                   8 clear glass body fragments (melted)
                   1 milk glass globe/shade fragment
        40–60 cm   1 porcelain insulator “250W 250V”
                   2 terra cotta flowerpot rim fragments
                   1 small wire
                   1 graphite battery cell
                                             C-2
Test
Unit    Depth      Artifact Description
                   3 clear glass finish and body fragments (crazed)
                   1 brown glass body fragment
                   1 clear glass light bulb base with filaments
                   1 porcelain body fragment—mauve/rose glaze
                   1 ceramic base fragment?
        60–80 cm   1 porcelain body fragment—light blue glaze
                   1 graphite battery cell
                   1 metal rectangular handle base/cover—decorated with wreath & ribbon design
        80–90 cm   1 whitewware rim fragment—vertical ribbed rim band, painted bowl band
                   1 piece slag
                   3 clear glass body fragments (melted)
                   1 clear glass body fragment
                   1 layered/sandwich glass rim fragment—milk and turquoise (melted)
                   1 ceramic body fragment—mauve/rose glazed

SHP 6   0–20 cm    1 brown glass body fragment
                   1 cobalt glass finish fragment (crazed)
                   1 clear glass chimney fragment
                   3 clear glass body fragments
                   1 clear glass, ribbed outside
                   1 aqua glass body fragment (crazed)
                   1 whiteware celadon rim fragment
                   1 ceramic body fragment—mint green glaze
                   2 ceramic body fragments—unglazed
                   1 metal pencil cap
                   1 recent pen nib?
                   1 hard rubber plug “DO NOT REMOVE PLUG WHILE CHARGING / MUST / BE
                     TIGHT / DO NOT REMOVE / LEAD VALVE”
        20–40 cm   1 sheet metal triangle
                   1 small metal gear
                   1 screw
                   1 metal light bulb part
                   1 piece charcoal
                   3 wire nail fragments—Post 1890/95
                   1 small rod
                   1 cobalt glass body fragment (crazed)
                   1 green glass body fragment
                   2 brown glass body fragments
                   7 clear glass body fragments
                   2 reddish glass body fragments
                   1 ceramic, orange-glazed rim fragment
                   1 stoneware body fragment, yellow glaze
        40–60 cm   Cloth pieces
                   2 pieces charcoal
                   1 small wood block
                   2 large metal wire nails—Post 1890/95
                   1 small wire nail— Post 1890/95
                   1 hard rubber misc.
                   1 tin spiral ribbon
                   1 terra cotta flowerpot body fragment
                   1 thin ceramic base
                   1 porcelain rim fragment, turquoise glaze
                   1 whiteware body fragment (melted)
                   1 milk glass lid liner fragment—Pat 1869
                   1 cobalt glass body fragment (crazed)
                   5 brown glass body fragments (crazed)
                                            C-3
Test
Unit    Depth       Artifact Description
                    5 clear glass body fragments
                    3 milk glass body fragments
                    2 aqua glass body fragments
                    1 clear glass body fragment “. . .EET. . ./ . . .CHED. . .” written in white
                    1 green glass body fragment
        60–80 cm    1 piece charcoal
                    3 bone other
                    5 metal wire nails— Post 1890/95
                    1 metal rod
                    1 brick fragment
                    1 ceramic utility pipe fragment
                    2 metal hunks
                    1 small triangle plate with hole
                    2 graphite pencil leads
                    2 milk glass glove/shade body fragments
                    6 clear glass body fragments (crazed)
                    4 aqua glass body fragments (crazed)
                    1 clear glass, stippled mold outside (crazed)
                    2 green glass body fragments
                    1 brown glass body fragment
                    1 ceramic body fragment scalloped edge (melted)
                    1 standing pig figurine
        80–100 cm   Cloth/fabric pieces
                    1 metal crown cap—Pat. 1892–P
                    3 graphite battery cells
                    1 small metal coil
                    1 metal wire
                    4 metal hunks
                    1 metal connector (internally threaded)
                    1 hard rubber misc.
                    2 bone other
                    2 pieces slag
                    5 brown glass body fragments
                    1 brown glass threaded finish (melted)
                    2 clear glass body fragments (melted)
                    4 green glass body fragments (crazed)
                    1 aqua glass body fragment
                    1 very small glass bottle finish & body, charm?—“47” on body
                    1 ceramic body fragment (melted)
                    2 ceramic body fragments, mauve/’rose glaze

SHP 7   0–20 cm     2 clear glass body fragments “. . .SI COLA (in rectangle)”—prob. PEPSI
                    1 clear glass painted label “. . .UDY CO. . .”
                    1 clear glass tube, closed at one end
                    1 graphite battery cell
        20–40 cm    1 clear glass base—“. . .48 / . . .las (script)”—Duraglas, since 1940
                    1 graphite battery cell
                    1 Chinese porcelain bowl base—Chinese “phoenix” pattern

SHP 8   20–40 cm    1 ceramic, mauve/rose glaze—date unknown
                    1 whiteware body fragment—hand-painted black, yellow, green dot and flower
                      pattern—date unknown
                    1 thin metal tin/container
        60–80 cm    1 whiteware rim fragment—multicolor floral decal and floral relief pattern—popular
                      1880–1920


                                                C-4

								
To top