Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20251017_PLN1415_Cultural Resource Report CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET DAHP Project Number: 2025-08-05567 Author: Tara McLaughlin, MA, RPA, and Jamie McLean, MA Title of Report: Cultural Resource Assessment for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County, Washington Date of Report: September 2, 2025 County(ies): Snohomish Section: 12 Township: 31 N Range: 5E Quad: Arlington East Acres: 2.3 PDF of Report uploaded to WISAARD report module (REQUIRED) Yes Historic Property Inventory Forms to be Approved Online? I-I Yes M No Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) found or amended? I-I Yes M No TCP(s) found? F1 Yes M No Replace a draft? I-I Yes M No Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? I-I Yes # M No Were Human Remains Found? F1 Yes DAHP Case # No DAHP Archaeological Site #: • Submission of PDFs into WISAARD's report module is required. • Please be sure that any PDF submitted to WISAARD has its cover sheet, figures, graphics, appendices, attachments, correspondence, etc., compiled into a single PDF file. • Please check that the PDF displays Revised 9-26-2018 correctly when opened. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County, Washington Prepared for: Visconsi Companies, Ltd. 30050 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 360 Pepper Pike, OH 44124 Prepared by: Tara McLaughlin, MA, RPA and Jamie McLean, MA Reviewed and Submitted by: Steven Dampf, MS, RPA Westland Engineering & Environmental Services 422 West Riverside Avenue, Suite 1330 Spokane, WA 99201 Cultural Resources Report No. 2025-250 DAHP Project No. 2025-08-05567 WestLand Project No. 14065 September 2, 2025 Trinity� s � west La n d Contains Privileged Information—Do Not Release Table of Contents REPORT ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION.............................................................................. 1 1.1 Regulatory Context and Area of Potential Impacts .................................................................... 1 1.2 Agency and Tribal Consultation.................................................................................................2 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT............................................................................................................5 2.1 Topography and Geology...........................................................................................................5 2.2 Soils...........................................................................................................................................6 2.3 Paleoclimate and Vegetational Shifts.........................................................................................7 2.4 Fauna.........................................................................................................................................7 3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT........................................................................................................................9 3.1 Precontact Period ......................................................................................................................9 3.2 Ethnographic Period ................................................................................................................ 12 3.3 Historic Period ......................................................................................................................... 14 4.0 LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................................... 16 4.1 Previous Cultural Resources Investigations............................................................................. 16 4.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Resources ..................................................................... 18 4.3 Cemeteries .............................................................................................................................. 19 4.4 Built Environment..................................................................................................................... 19 4.4.1 Assessor's Data...................................................................................................................20 4.5 Historic Maps and Aerial Imagery............................................................................................20 4.6 DAHP Archaeological Risk Assessment Model........................................................................21 5.0 ANTICIPATED FINDS........................................................................................................................23 6.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................................24 6.1 Survey Methods.......................................................................................................................24 6.2 Survey Results.........................................................................................................................24 7.0 SUMMARYAND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................30 8.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................31 Page i Trinit Westland Consultants Figures Figure1. Project location........................................................................................................................ 3 Figure 2. Area of potential impacts.........................................................................................................4 Figure3. 1910 Anderson map............................................................................................................... 22 Figure 4. Overview of south portion of API (parking lot at left); view east............................................. 25 Figure 5. Overview of north portion of API (central berm at right); view east........................................ 25 Figure 6. Overview of north portion of API with previous disturbance related to utility installation along the adjacent parking lot and sidewalk in foreground and residential development to the east and southeast; view southeast. ............................................................................................. 26 Figure 7 Results of survey. .................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 8. STP 2 profile at 70 cmbs. ...................................................................................................... 28 Figure 9. STP 12 profile at 100 cmbs.................................................................................................... 28 Figure 10. Plow zone artifacts identified in STP 7 (0-24 cmbs)............................................................. 29 Figure 11. Plow zone artifacts from STP-10. ......................................................................................... 30 Tables Table 1. Soil Properties Within API........................................................................................................ 6 Table 3. Previous Cultural Resource Investigations Within 1.6 km (1 mi.) of the API.......................... 16 Table 4. Previously Recorded Archaeological Resources Within 1.6 km (1 mi.) of the API................ 19 Appendices Appendix A. Schematic for Proposed Development • Figure A.1 Schematic Print Appendix B. Shovel Test Probe Results • Table B.1 Summary of Shovel Test Probe Results Appendix C. Inadvertent Discovery Plan Page ii Trinit Westland Consultants REPORT ABSTRACT Report Title: Cultural Resources Assessment for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County, Washington Report Date: September 2, 2025 Project Name: Arlington Medical Facility Project Project Location: Northwest corner of 212th Street NE and Medical Center Drive, Arlington (portions of Snohomish County parcels 31051200200400 and 31051200202700) Project Sponsor: Public Hospital District#3, Snohomish County (PHD#3) Lead Agency: City of Arlington Economic and Community Development Department(City) Applicable Regulations: State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Funding Source: Private Description of the Project/Undertaking: PHD#3, in coordination with Visconsi and the City, is planning to construct a 30,000-square-foot, three-story building with associated parking, driveways, and landscaping. Project Area of Potential Impacts (API): Construction footprint for all the project elements described above, encompassing a total of 2.3 acres. Legal Description: SW '/4 of the NW '/4 of Section 12 of Township 31 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Merdian USGS 7.5' Quadrangle(s): Arlington East Land Jurisdiction: Private Acres Surveyed: 2.3 acres Consultant Firm/Organization: Westland Engineering & Environmental Services (Westland) Project Number: 14065 Date(s) of Fieldwork:August 2 and 13, 2025 Number of Isolates Recorded: None Number of Sites Recorded: None Management Recommendations: No further cultural resources study is recommended for this project. WestLand recommends that all ground-disturbing activities be carried out under the inadvertent discovery plan (IDP)for cultural resources and human remains, provided in Appendix C. Page iii Tri�nits AA WestLand 1 .0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION WestLand Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. (WestLand), was contracted by Visconsi Companies, Ltd. (Visconsi), to conduct a cultural resources assessment for the proposed Arlington Medical Facility Project (the Project) located in the city of Arlington, in the SW '/4 of the NW '/4 of Section 12 in Township 31 North, Range 5 East(T31 N, R5E),Willamette Meridian (WM), as depicted on the Arlington East, Washington, 7.5-minute US Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle (Figure 1). Public Hospital District#3, Snohomish County (PHD#3), in coordination with Visconsi and the City of Arlington Economic and Community Development Department (City), is planning to construct a 30,000-square-foot, three-story building with associated parking, driveways, and landscaping on a mostly undeveloped property encompassing portions of two parcels (31051200200400 and 31051200202700) totaling approximately 2.3 acres located at the northwest corner of 212th Street NE and Medical Center Drive(Figure 2; proposed design plan provided in Appendix A). 1 .1 Regulatory Context and Area of Potential Impacts The Project is subject to compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C Revised Code of Washington (RCW), and statutes regarding the protection of archaeological and historic resources (Washington Administrative Code 197-11, RCW 27.44, and RCW 27.53). SEPA requires local governments and state agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal. The City is the lead agency for SEPA compliance. Question 13 of the SEPA checklist allows the agency, with guidance from the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) and the affected Tribes, to assess whether there have been efforts to identify significant historic, archeological, and traditional cultural sites that might be impacted, as well as how to avoid or mitigate any identified impacts. The project will also require a Special Use Permit from the City, including a cultural resources assessment as a condition of the Permit. In coordination with Visconsi, PHD#3, and the City, WestLand is recommending that the Project's area of potential impacts (API) be defined as the construction footprint for the project elements described above, encompassing a total of 2.3 acres(see Figure 2).This API is intended to address the areas that will receive subsurface impacts from any proposed ground disturbance. No built-environment resources 50 years old or older are located on immediately adjacent parcels; as such, no indirect(visual, noise,and so forth)effects are anticipated. Trinity �\ Page 1 Consultants � WestLand 1 .2 Agency and Tribal Consultation In accordance with SEPA, the City submitted documentation regarding the Project to the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians (Stillaguamish). In response, the Stillaguamish Cultural Resources Department requested that a cultural resources survey of the API be completed prior to ground disturbance. On behalf of the City, Westland sent the Stillaguamish Cultural Resources Department an email on July 31, 2025, describing the proposed survey methodology and inviting a tribal representative to observe the fieldwork. Trinity �\ Page Consultants � WestLand Path:G:A14000sV14065VARCAArlington MedFacilityVArcGISproAFrontMattcr 14065-aprx 1 Projoct location Date,8/27/2025 User.Dan Van Esscn ti • , -Arlington \ o ^ Junction Mae e,;L � .1 -�_ - ' Imo. , •O . 1 � �\ r 1 Is 17 t n�[_ 6 / - _ •oe �,s Arlington. S ' Al n�iYJ F �• r= rf. tys az Cree 1 ,• ,_ 1 ram• � ` r -- ~ I Cemetery• n5 �I .. i i � �.. a _- •� ----- - u �h?I}lt X le Home •�� `� 1 I .. Parks '�,' 16 IF 18 `Water SM144 / ! T31 N, R5E,a Portion of Section 12, �f Snohomish County,Washington, Legend Arlington Arlington East USGS 7.5'Quadrangle Junction Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N Q API Arlington D N 0 1,000 2,000 m River _ ^ Feet �0 Cou Jv ` Engineering& p Environmental 0 300 600 G� WestLand Services Meters Figure 1. Project location map Page 3 Path:G.\14000s\14065WRC\ArlingtonMedFacilityWrcGlSpro\FrontMatter 14065.aprx:2API Date:8/27/2025 User:DanVanEssen L' r Medical Center,Dr 212th St NE ft r . T31 N, R5E,a Portion of Section 12, Snohomish County,Washington, Legend Image source:7/16/2024 O API Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 1 ON N 0 50 100 Feet Jv ` Engineering& WestLand EServices nvironmental 0 15 3 Meters Figure 2. Area of potential impacts Page 4 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT Changing environmental conditions affect the kinds of resources available to people, the distribution of those resources, and the suitability of landforms for human occupation. This section presents information about conditions that influence the likelihood of intact archaeological deposits being present in the API and discusses features of the natural environment that would have encouraged or discouraged settlement of the API by past populations. Literature reviewed for this project includes environmental data from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WA DNR) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) online soil survey, and resources in WestLand's library related to the geology and landform formation processes and natural resources available in and around the API. 2.1 Topography and Geology The API is located approximately 1.3 km (0.8 mi. southwest of the South Fork Stillaguamish River and between 50.9 and 59.5 m(167,0 to 195.0 ft.)above mean sea level (amsl), at the eastern edge of the Puget Trough physiographic province (Franklin and Dyrness 1988:70-90). The Puget Trough, also known as the Puget Lowland, occupies a north—south depression between the Olympic Mountains and the western slopes of the Cascade Mountains extending from the Canadian border to the lower Columbia River along the Oregon border. The southern Cascades are composed primarily of tertiary andesite and basalt flows with associated breccias and tuffs, and minor amounts of igneous intrusive, sedimentary, or metamorphic rocks (McKee 1972:292). Dating to roughly 50 million years ago, limestone deposits in the vicinity of Snoqualmie Pass (approximately 100 km [62 mi.] southeast of the API) are remnants of the western coast of North America. From the Pass north along the Snoqualmie River, the Olney Pass terrane is a coarse mixture of enormous sandstone blocks set in a shaley matrix. The major Cascade Range building period that included activities such as volcanism, folding, faulting, and uplift slowed by the end of the mid- Pleistocene (Orr and Orr 1996:95). The Puget Lowland was shaped by at least four periods of extensive glaciation during the Pleistocene (Easterbrook 2003; Lasmanis 1991). The bedrock was depressed and deeply scoured by glacial ice, and glacial outwash from retreating glaciers mantled areas above the valley floors, forming moraines that are today expressed as ridges. A thick mantle of glacial drift and outwash deposits were left across much of Snohomish County at the end of the last of these glacial periods, the Fraser Glaciation (Easterbrook 2003). The Vashon Stade of the Fraser Glaciation began around 18,000 BP with an advance of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet into the lowlands (Porter and Swanson 1998). The Puget Lobe of the ice sheet flowed down into the Puget Lowland and reached its terminus just south of Olympia between 14,500-14,000 BP (Clague and James 2002; Easterbrook 2003).The depth of the ice near the current API is estimated to have been about 1,800-2,000 m (5,905-6,560 ft.; Easterbrook 2003). Trinity �\ Page Consultants A& Westland The Puget Lobe began to retreat shortly after reaching its terminus. Marine waters entered the lowlands that had been carved out by the glacier and filled Puget Sound. Everson glaciomarine drift deposits dating between 12,500-11,500 BP were released from the melting glacial ice and deposited on the sea floor across the northern and central Puget Lowland (Easterbrook 2003). The enormous weight of the ice had depressed the land, but as the crust rebounded, relative sea levels fell and exposed some of the drift deposits (Clague and James 2002; Easterbrook 2003). The Cordilleran Ice Sheet advanced once again during the Sumas Stade of the Fraser Glaciation from ca. 11,600-10,000 BP, leaving glacial till and outwash deposits in northwestern Washington (Kovanen and Easterbrook 2002) 2.2 SOIIS Descriptions of mapped sediments for the API are derived from the USDA Web Soil Survey (USDA 2025). The sediments currently mapped in the API fall under two classifications:Alderwood (98.4 %) and Ragnar (1.6 %). The predominant series of Alderwood is described as a gravelly sandy loam located on 0 to 8 % slopes. This series is found on glacial drift plains, is a moderately well drained xeric, made up of glacial drift and outwash over dense glaciomarine deposits. A description of these soil properties can be found in Table 1. The probability of where cultural resources may be located is primarily based on ground surface slope and depth of sediments. Deeper soils located on flat Holocene-aged landforms have a higher likelihood of containing buried cultural materials. Contrarily, shallow soils on steeper landforms have a lower probability of containing buried cultural deposits. Table 1. Soil Properties Within API Mapped Soil Depth Horizon Color Texture Rock(%) Age (curbs) 0-18 A Brown (10YR 5/3) Gravelly sandy 15 to 65 Holocene loam 18-53 Bw1 Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) Very gravelly 15 to 65 Holocene sandy loam 53-75 Bw2 Pale brown (10YR 6/3) Very gravelly 15 to 65 Holocene sandy loam Alderwood 75-89 Bg Light yellowish brown (2.5YR Very gravelly 35 to 85 Holocene/ 6/4) sandy loam Pleistocene 89-109 2Cd1 Light brownish gray(2.5YR Very gravelly 15 to 45 Pleistocene 6/2) sandy loam Dense glacial till 109-150 2Cd2 Light gray(2.5YR 7/2) that breaks to 15 to 45 Pleistocene very gravelly sandy loam Trinity �\ Page Consultants A& Westland 2.3 Paleoclimate and Vegetational Shifts Based on regional studies of the early post-glacial paleoenvironment, the Project vicinity displayed tundra characteristics and supported open forests of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) and red alder (Alnus rubra). New tree species such as Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) became established between 12,000 and 7000 BP, when summers were warmer and winters were cooler than the modern environment. This pattern was followed by a period between 7500 and 4000 BP that was warm and dry, when scattered oak and grasses slowly became replaced by"coniferous forests dominated by Douglas fir, then, around 4000 years ago, by western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), which suggests the area had increasing moisture and declining temperatures" (Hebda 1995:63, taken from Lewarch et al. 1999:13). In this cooler environment, the western hemlock and Douglas fir forests became dense, limiting faunal grazing land and restricting some food plants. The abundant moisture hastened the development of western red cedar(Thuja plicata) and western hemlock, creating a closed-canopy forest that was relatively stable into the Historic period until logging of old-growth trees in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Lewarch et al. 1999:14). Today, western Washington is part of the Western Hemlock vegetation zone, characterized by Douglas fir, red alder, and Western red cedar. Silver fir(Abies amabilis), Grand fir(Abies grandis), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) are less common but still present. Western white pine (Pinus monticola), and lodgepole pine are considered major species in the Puget Sound Province and a minor species throughout the rest of western Washington (Franklin and Dyrness 1988:58). Within the Western Hemlock vegetation zone, forest understories are typically dense, consisting of shrubs and herbaceous species such as deer fern(Blechnum spicant),sword fern(Polystichum munitum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), salal (Gaultheria shallon), Oregon grape(Berberis nervosa), and rose (Rosa gymnocarpa)(Franklin and Dyrness 1988).Along the waterways and in wetter areas,flora includes lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum), water parsley (Oenathe sarmentosa), coast willow (Salix hookeriana), red alder, and various sedges (Carex spp.). Inland prairies feature understory vegetation including camas (Camassia quamash) and a host of edible tubers, berries, fruits, and nuts (Franklin and Dyrness 1988). 2.4 Fauna The Precontact and Historic period environment provided foraging and breeding habitats for a wide range of terrestrial and aquatic mammals, including elk (Cervus elaphus); black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus); black bear (Ursus americanus); coyote (Canis latrans); cougar, or mountain lion Trinity �\ Page Consultants A& Westland (Puma concolor); raccoon (Procyon lotor); red fox (Vulpes vulpes); and porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum) (Larrison 1976).Wetland habitats common along stream courses like Deer Creek supported a diverse array of fauna, including waterfowl (Aix and Anas spp.), beaver (Castor canadensis), river otter (Lutra canadensis), and mink or weasel (Mustela spp.) (Kruckeberg 1991; Larrison 1976). The Stillaguamish River watershed has historically supported large populations of resident and anadromous fish species, including chinook salmon (Oncorhyncus tshawytscha), coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), and steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). The watershed also supports a number of other fish species, including bull trout (Salvelinus conjluentus), sea-run cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki clarki), and pygmy whitefish (Prosopium coulteri) (Snohomish Conservation District 2017; Washington State Department of Ecology 1995). Trinity �\ Page Consultants A& Westland 3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT Archaeological studies, ethnographic accounts, and historical records provide a framework in which to identify and evaluate cultural resources within the API. Archaeological studies documenting successive occupation episodes in the region provide general information about settlement patterns, resource use, and subsistence economies. Ethnographic and historical sources contain accounts of Native American occupation and land use after Euro-American encroachment. Historical documents, maps, and aerial photographs contain information about settlement,transportation, and agricultural activities.All these types of sources were consulted for this review. 3.1 Precontact Period Human occupation and utilization of the Stillaguamish River drainage has been continuous from approximately 16,000 years ago, based on archaeological evidence from the areas south of the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet in western Washington and from sites in eastern Washington.Archaeological, ethnographic, and historical investigations over the past several decades have provided regional contexts for evaluating potential archaeological finds within the API (Blukis Onat 1987; Carlson 1990; Greengo 1983; Larson and Lewarch 1995; Matson and Coupland 1995; Meltzer and Dunnell 1987; Nelson 1990). A summary of hypothesized regional precontact-era settlement patterns can be found in Table 2. Archaeological evidence in this region suggests that soon after the land emerged from the last glacial retreat, Native populations moved into the tundra-like environment in pursuit of now-extinct megafauna, while also opportunistically hunting small game and gathering plant resources (Kopper) et al. 2016; Waters et al. 2011). Until recently, the evidence for human settlement of the Puget Lowlands prior to 10,000 years ago was primarily the presence of a small number of isolated fluted projectile points (Avey n.d.; Carlson 1990; Kopperl et al. 2016; Meltzer and Dunnell 1987). Archaeological investigations conducted at the Bear Creek Site (45K1839) confirmed Native American settlement of the Puget Lowlands by at least 10,000 years ago.At this site, lithic artifacts were found on top of glacial deposits and below a peat deposit with radiocarbon and luminescence dates between approximately 12,500 and 10,000 cal. BP (Kopper) et al. 2016). Human hunting of extinct fauna has been corroborated by finds at the Manis mastodon site (Gustafson et al. 1979).The presence of a bone projectile point embedded in a mastodon rib has been substantiated, and combined DNA testing and accelerator mass spectrometry dates indicate the animal was hunted and killed ca. 13,860 to 13,763 BP (Lawler 2011; Waters et al. 2011).Archaeological evidence for these early sites (prior to about 8000 years ago)typically include isolated artifacts and lithic scatters representing field camps and procurement/processing sites (Kopper) et al. 2016). Trinity �\ Page Consultants A& Westland Table 2. Summary of Regional Precontact-Era Settlement Patterns (adapted from Chatters et al. 2011, Kopperl et al. 2016, and Cooper et al. 2014) Period Tool Types Location Preferences Associated Data Paleoindian large, concave-based,triangular isolated sites in or near lakes and Pleistocene mammal bone 16,000-10,000 BP spear points(Clovis points) bogs; artifacts would be located on orin glacial soils with butchery marks upland environments near the base of the Cascade foothills and on raised post-glacial period; small the Olcott Phase (part of the Old terraces along major rivers;few number of rock-like cooking Early Holocene Cordilleran Culture);tool types pits have been found that Foragers include leaf-shaped spear points isolated Olcott spear points have were used to process starchy 10,000-7000 BP and knives, scraping tools been found in bogs; isolates more, and plant foods(camas roots, cobble tools known as"choppers" common on steep slopes along major acorns); appears to river valleys; artifacts are located on or in glacial soils represent a foraging society as forests became denser early tools similar to those seen in and less useful for human the early Holocene; later sites after 5000 BP, shell middens increase food procurement(7000 BP), Middle Holocene add microblades, side-notched in marine sites; bone tools and marine environments Foragers projectile points, and large, ornaments found in middens; upland stabilized and became more 7000-3500 BP stemmed projectile points; post sites often located in valley bottoms productive; people 6000 BP, ground-slate knives, of high terraces and consist of stone increasingly concentrated adzes, and whetstones have tools and fire-broken rocks food-gathering activities on been documented the riverbanks and marine shoreline seasonal camps have been found in similar to tools used in the latter the prairies of south King and from 3500 to 4000 BP, the part of the Middle Holocene but northern Pierce Counties; people cultures of the Northwest Developmental seasonally specific;tools in moved to locations that allowed for Coast shifted subsistence Northwest Coast mass-harvest of food (salmon, deer, strategies from immediate Culture seasonal prairie habitation areas consist of large, stemmed clams, and/or roots); larger,year- consumption of foodstuffs to 3500-2500 BP round habitations also were used as amassing, processing, and projectile points,flake tools, and well; small, rectangular dwellings are storing food for later concentrations of cooking rock associated with these areas north of consumption Puget Sound large villages of long, split-plank seasonal habitation areas houses created on rivers and along saltwater shores and maintained established up to 3500 BP continued to be used and year-round; upland seasonal-use habitation areas used, leaving dense new ones were established; same sites were used Northwest Coast arrow points replaced large atlatl scatters of stone tools and fire- Culture dart points,toolkit is otherwise modified rock; similar habitation seasonally for harvesting 2500-250 BP similar to previous period areas made along rivers for fishing; resources; large,thick shell these are commonly found on the middens formed at clamming and fishing locations and at floodplains of river basins in the Puget Sound and Cascade foothills, many other localities along often well preserved due to the shoreline where fresh deposition of flood sediments water enters Puget Sound Trinity �\ Page 10 Consultants A& Westland Period Tool Types Location Preferences Associated Data at turn of nineteenth century, use of metal points and stone points, people traded with iron harpoon tips along with bone, by 1850, many longhouses replaced Europeans/Euroamericans Euroamerican and copper hooks bent from by smaller, less elaborate houses; in Contact Period ships'copper; otherwise similar to the 1850s, Native people forced to for iron, copper, mirrors, and 250-100 BP previous period; as the century sign treaties; most were relocated to beads, incorporating the new progressed, European/ reservations materials into their existing technologies Euroamerican tools and technologies were adopted Early residential base camp sites dating to between 8000 and 5000 BP are commonly found on inland and upland glacial outwash surfaces in the Puget Lowland, northwest Washington, and inland western Washington foothill valleys (Kidd 1964; Mattson 1985). Regionally, these sites are referred to as "Olcott," named after the type site (45SN14; Kidd 1964) located 3.6 km (2.2 mi.) southeast of the API, and as "Cascade" to the east of the Cascade Mountain Range. These assemblages are typified by lanceolate- shaped projectile points and a generalist assemblage characteristic of the Archaic Period (ca. 8000- 4000 BP) in the Puget Sound (Blukis Onat et al. 2001). Olcott lithic assemblages typically include opportunistic tools derived from local cobbles; large, leaf-shaped and stemmed points; scrapers; flaked cobbles; and waste flakes. Sites during this time frame have been interpreted as evidence of an early, mobile hunting and gathering adaptation. Age estimates of Olcott sites have been inferred from the similarity of the assemblages to older(ca. 10,000- 6000 BP) dated components from British Columbia and eastern Washington (Ames and Maschner 1999; Carlson and Dalla Bona 1996). Sites with Olcott-type assemblages are often located in elevated areas some distance inland from modern shorelines (e.g., Chatters et al. 2011). This pattern may have persisted for over 6,000 years,with the end of this time period marked by an increased reliance on marine and riverine resources. Marine resource use may extend back farther in time, but evidence that might exist on early shorelines has been inundated by rising sea levels, which reached near-modern elevations only by about 5000 BP (Kopper) et al. 2016). As the climate and sea level stabilized after about 5000 BP, local populations increased and utilized a diverse array of landforms and resources. Native populations became more reliant on marine resources and anadromous fish, gradually shifting to semisedentary subsistence patterns marked by the seasonal round (Carlson and Dalla Bona 1996; Kopperl et al. 2016; Matson and Coupland 1995). Development of marine-oriented cultures is apparent around 2500 BP. Archaeological sites from this later period (post 2500 BP) include village sites, residential base camps, field camps, and special-use sites. Residential village sites represent the winter village described by early ethnographers.These sites are often recognized by large shell middens located near the modern shoreline or inland at river confluences. Base camps and Trinity �\ Page 11 Consultants A& Westland field camps represent the exploitation of specific plant and animal resources by task groups travelling out from the winter village. Base camps may include hearth features, evidence of shelters, and features and artifacts indicative of processing, preservation, or preparation of plant and animal resources. Field camps reflect short duration use by small task groups and may include hunting and plant processing sites represented by lithic debris scatters, formed tools such as projectile points and scrapers, and fire-modified rock (FMR) features (Kopper) et al. 2016). Special-use sites include lithic and mineral quarries, peeled cedars, or spiritual sites. 3.2 Ethnographic Period Based on oral history and ethnographic accounts, this period is generally regarded as the transition from the Late Precontact period to the approximate point in time when Native Americans were placed on reservations. The Ethnographic period (500-150 BP) can be divided into Protocontact (500-210 BP) and Contact (210-150 BP) periods. This is in recognition of the significant impact that European activities had in the region prior to actual person-to-person interaction.These Protocontact impacts included disease and trade goods (both of which could have been introduced well ahead of the earliest European trappers and traders; e.g., Ames et al. 1999). The Native Americans who occupied the region encompassing the API considered by anthropologists to be part of the Puget Sound Salish culture. Characteristics of the Salish culture included an economy based on salmon as a staple, a seasonal settlement pattern that utilized permanent winter villages composed of large plank houses and short-term campsites located at prominent resource patches, and a society composed of three distinct social classes: slaves, commoners, and nobles (Miss and Campbell 1991:22; Smith 1941). The API lies within the traditional territory of the Lushootseed-speaking Stillaguamish, originally called the Stoluck-wa-mish River Tribe, and part of the Southern Coast Salish regional group. The name Stillaguamish (under various spellings) has been used since about 1850 to describe those people who lived along the Stillaguamish River and its tributaries (Lane 1973; Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians 2020; Suttles and Lane 1990). Like other Southern Coast Salish Tribes, the Stillaguamish followed a seasonal round, occupying primary villages along the river during the winter and temporary campsites during the spring, summer, and fall while traveling to seasonal-use areas for procuring game (including marine and freshwater fish/shellfish) and plants for food, medicine, and utilitarian purposes (Baenen 1981; Suttles and Lane 1990). This movement across the landscape to resource areas located in varying environmental zones created high levels of interaction between groups of people, and many resource areas were shared between groups based on mutual friendship, marriage, or special permission. In his 1927 testimony before the Indian Claims Commission, Stillaguamish Tribal Member James Dorsey (Quil-Que-Kadam), who was born in 1850 and grew up along the Stillaguamish River, stated that both the Sauk-Suiattle and Skagit peoples were permitted into the Stillaguamish territory to visit or to join hunting parties (Lane 1973). Trinity �\ Page 12 Consultants A& Westland Smith (1941:209) documented two Stillaguamish villages in the current Project vicinity: one near present- day Trafton (Chuck-Kol-Che), approximately 6.4 km (4.0 mi.) northwest of the API, and a larger village known as Skabalko (sgw0algw0, meaning to gather, or unite fresh water) near the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork of the Stillaguamish River in present-day Arlington, approximately 1.8 km (1.1 mi.) southwest of the API. Skabalko was a massive village complex that was widely known as a gathering place and/or trading location for people traveling the Stillaguamish River(Tracey Boser, personal communication 2020, in Dampf and Heideman 2021; Lane 1973; Larsen et al. 2016). According to Bruseth (1926), the village "was known far and wide. Sauks travelling to the Sound and back, Snohobish coming down the South Fork, parties coming upriver to dig for roots, spaykoolist and leek at Kent's Prairie (xwba'gwab)nearly always stopped there and camped." Permanent villages such as Skabalko were made up of large wooden plank-houses that housed multigenerational extended families. Information on the village location was originally documented in 1850 and 1851, when coal was discovered along the Stillaguamish River. At the time, the Euro-American men who located the coal were likely some of the first non-Native people to travel to this location (Lane 1973). This village is also described in Mr. Dorsey's 1927 testimony before the Indian Claims Commission; he notes its location in Section 2, Township 31 North, Range 5 East, WM, and that it was comprised of two large plank houses, a cemetery, and several hundred people near the river. Fish traps were also noted at this location by Mr. Dorsey (Lane 1973:26), and three families continued to live there until as late as 1890 (Tracey Boser, personal communication 2020). Subsistence for the Stillaguamish and other Pacific Northwest indigenous groups depended heavily on salmon. Living upriver, however, the majority of Stillaguamish had smaller catches and supplemented their salmon stores with a greater amount of game meat than did their coastal neighbors (Baenen 1981:418). The prairies and wetlands surrounding Skabalko and the North Fork/South Fork confluence were a readily accessible and plentiful source of game and wild plant crops. These included wild onion and edible roots, bulbs, and tubers as well as various grass, sedge, and reed species that were utilized in basket making (Larsen et al. 2016). Deer and elk were commonly hunted throughout the Stillaguamish River drainage and particularly on the flats north of Arlington, in the Sultan Basin, in the Lake Cavanaugh area, along Jim Creek, and near Barlow Pass (Baenen 1981). Present-day Arlington lies in an area historically known as stigayu?, meaning wolf, due to a high population of wolves in the area, and neighboring prairies to the south were known as bagwab (Tracey Boser, personal communication 2020). Kent Prairie, located approximately 2.1 km (1.3 mi.) south of the river confluence and 1.9 km (1.2 mi.)northwest of the currentAPI,was a particularly prolific traditional plant-gathering area that was frequented by the Stillaguamish, Sauk, and Snohomish (Baenen 1981). The area is depicted on the 1875 General Land Office (GLO) survey plat along a marshy area/small creek (US Surveyor General [USSG] 1875). Trinity �\ Page 13 Consultants A& Westland The history of the mid-nineteenth century in the Pacific Northwest is dominated by the US government's attempts to establish treaties with Tribal groups in order to solidify its claim on what is now Washington State over that of British-held Canada. The Stillaguamish, along with representatives from the Snohomish, Sauk-Suiattle, Skagit, Snoqualmie, Suquamish, Lummi, Skopamish (Muckleshoot), Kikiallus, and Duwamish Tribes gathered in 1855 to sign the Treaty of Point Elliott, which proposed to give all the signing Tribes monetary payment, hunting and fishing rights, and other services in return for surrendering their ancestral lands (Lane 1973). After the signing of the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliott, the Stillaguamish were directed to relocate to the Tulalip Reservation. Many did not relocate to the reservation and instead stayed near their ancestral lands. Individuals of Native American descent living off-reservation in the Puget Sound region often purchased land privately or occasionally received an off-reservation allotment within their ancestral lands. As with all Native Americans in the post-treaty era, they augmented their traditional subsistence practices with Euro-American pursuits such as agriculture, logging, industrial labor, and other work (Huggins 1984; Ruby and Brown 1992:72-23, 140). 3.3 Historic Period Following the arrival of non-Native settlers in the Pacific Northwest (by the mid-1850s), many Native village/habitation sites were subsequently homesteaded or platted as towns; most areas that were previously inhabited by Native Americans were generally as desirable to non-Native settlers as they were to the areas' original inhabitants. This was especially true for locations near water, at river confluences, or along traditionally utilized travel corridors/trails, many of which continued to be in use into the historic period if not the modern era. Snohomish County was originally part of Island County. In 1861, Snohomish County was formed by the territorial legislature. The first county seat was Mukilteo, but it was moved to Snohomish six months later. After the formation of the new county, settlements began at Lowell, Monroe, Stanwood, and Edmonds. Settlers were drawn to the fertile soil and easy access to water in these areas. Extensive logging and mining activity has taken place throughout the region from the mid-1800s to the present, and the construction and expansion of transportation corridors associated with railroads and roadways had a profound effect on the landscape in this area (Riddle 2006). The Project vicinity has transformed drastically over the past 150 years. It has changed from old-growth forest and agricultural lands to a mix of residential and industrial development. History of Arlington The first non-Native settler in the Arlington area was J. L. "Frank" Kent, who arrived in 1877. Many other settlers began inhabiting the area in the 1880s.A road had been cut by the Army in 1856 from Snohomish to just below the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork of the Stillaguamish River(City of Arlington 2025). Trinity �\ Page 14 Consultants A& Westland The city of Arlington began as two distinct towns (Haller City and Arlington) platted in the spring of 1890 and separated by a 40-acre parcel, the ownership of which was contested by McMann and Stephens, until McMann bought Stephens out in order to end the dispute during the depression of the 1890s (Interstate Publishing Company 1906). In 1880, a road was cut roughly following the original US Army trail between the forks of the Stillaguamish River (on which Haller City was located) and Stanwood to facilitate the movement of loggers and goods through the area without having to rely upon canoe freighting (City of Arlington 2025; Interstate Publishing Company 1906). Haller City started with the construction of its first general store in 1888 by the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork of the Stillaguamish River. The store was run by N. K. Tvete and N. H. Johnson. In 1889, the White House Hotel was built by Lee Rogers and M. Dinsmore. Haller City was platted by Maurice Haller, the son of a well-known military figure named Granville O. Haller. The land was originally patented to Louis Smith, who later sold the property to John Irving, who sold it to Maurice Haller. Maurice drowned early in the formation of the town, and his interest in the town was passed on to three other men. Haller City grew rapidly at first, housing a sawmill, two saloons, a four-story hotel, a drug store, and a newspaper by 1890 (Interstate Publishing Company 1906). In 1890, the construction train for the building of the Seattle, Lake Shore, & Eastern Railroad arrived at the site of the original Town of Arlington. The building of the railroad distinguished Arlington from Haller City. Arlington was platted by Earl and McLeod, railroad contractors, who had purchased the land from Alfred Gifford. In 1890,Arlington started out with a newspaper and an "eating tent,"where people could purchase hot meals. It quickly grew to include a saloon, general store, hardware store, two restaurants, and a three- story hotel (Interstate Publishing Company 1906). By 1893, the combined population of the two towns was 500. Arlington weathered the depression of the 1890s well, and the population continued to increase. In 1903, when the towns came together and incorporated, the population within the corporate limits was 800; by 1905, the population was up to 1,700 (Interstate Publishing Company 1906). Arlington has always been a logging town and has been home to multiple logging companies, sawmills, and shingle mills. After areas were cleared, much of the land was used for agriculture and as dairy farms (City of Arlington 2025). Trinity �\ Page 15 Consultants A& Westland 4.0 LITERATURE REVIEW WestLand reviewed the DAHP's online Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) for archaeological site records and cultural resources survey reports within a 1.6 km (1 mi.) radius of the API. The DAHP's statewide predictive model layer was reviewed for probability estimates for the presence of cultural resources, and WestLand also examined online resources such as the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) GLO survey records database, the USGS historical topographic maps database, and other online map databases, as well as review of aerial imagery to complement the cultural context provided in the preceding section. 4.1 Previous Cultural Resources Investigations No previous cultural resources investigations have been conducted directly within the API; however, 23 cultural resource investigations have been completed within a 1.6 km (1 mi.) radius (Table 3), including 3 within less than 183 m (600 ft.) to the east, around 212th Street NE. The archaeological research completed in the vicinity of the API has been associated with development-oriented projects; included in Table 3 are examples of road improvement, wastewater, pipeline, residential construction, transmission line, and trail development projects. Six of the investigations resulted in the identification of cultural resources within 1.6 km (1 mi.) of the API (see Table 3). Table 2. Previous Cultural Resource Investigations Within 1.6 km (1 mi.)of the API NADB# Reference Report Title Cultural Materials Distance and Identified* Direction from API Cultural Resource Survey of Northwest Pipeline Corporation's Capacity Replacement Project, 1344814 Ozbun 2004 Western Washington:Addendum None 1 km (0.60 mi)east One Supplemental Surveys of Workspace, Extra Workspace, Access Roads, and Pipeyards Evaluation of Six Cultural Resources for the Northwest Pipeline 1.4 km (0.84 mi) 1345757 Chapman 2005 Corporation's Capacity Replacement None northeast Project, Western Washington Cultural Resource Survey of the Northwest Pipeline Corporation's Capacity Replacement Project, Seattle, Lake Shore& 1.4 km (0.86 mi) 1346406 Ozbun 2005 Western Washington Addendum Eastern (SLS&E) southwest Seven:Seattle Lake Shore & Railway Eastern Railway Spur at the Arlington 3 Pipeyard Cultural Resource Survey of 1.5 km (0.90 mi) 1346663 Sharma 2005 Northwest Pipeline Corporation's None northeast Capacity Replacement Project Trinity �\ Page 16 Consultants A& WestLand NADB# Reference Report Title Cultural Materials Distance and Identified* Direction from API Cultural Resources Assessment for 1.5 km (0.93 mi.) 1348795 Gillis 2006 the Arlington Wastewater Treatment 45SN409 northwest Project,Arlington Blukis Onat Cultural Resource Preliminary 1.3 km (0.83 mi.) 1348998 2006 Survey of the Centennial Trail Phase None northwest Draft:Phase 2 Cultural Resources 1353374 Piper 2009 Assessment for the Sedro Woolley 45SN486 129 m (424 ft.)east Horse Ranch Transmission Line Upgrade Archaeological Monitoring for the 0.3 km (0.19 mi.) 1680049 Compas 2010 Sedro-Woolley Horse Ranch None southeast Transmission Line Rebuild Project Archaeological Assessment for the 1680166 Chambers 2010 67th Avenue Phase 111 Improvement SLS&E Railway spur 1.2 km (0.72 mi.)west Project Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington Addendum to the Archaeological 1685034 Iverson 2014 Assessment for the 67th Avenue SLS&E Railway spure 1.3 km (0.81 mi.) Phase III Improvement Project, southwest Arlington Prairie Creek Drainage 1.5 km (0.92 mi.) 1685105 Wilson 2013 Improvements Project Phase 2 None southwest Construction, City of Arlington Cultural Resources Survey for 2016 1.5 km (0.94 mi.) 1688317 Homan 2016 Snohomish District Priority Wood None northeast Pole Replacement Project Cultural Resources Assessment for 177 m (580 ft.)east- 1688852 Steinkraus 2015 the Eagle Creek Substation Project, None southeast Arlington. East Arlington Substation Project, an Addendum to the Cultural Resources 1691492 Hushour 2017 Assessment for the Eagle Creek None 134 m (440 ft.)east Substation Project,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington Archaeological Survey and 1691924 Larsen 2016 Evaluation of the Proposed Park 77 None 1.1 km (0.66 mi.) Development,Arlington, Snohomish southwest County, Washington Archaeological Resources Survey for the Temporary Extra Work Area at 1692412 Pierson 2019 Williams Northwest Pipeline None 0.9 km (0.56 mi.) Arlington Meter Station at Milepost northeast 1422.56, Snohomish County, Washington,Addendum Report Cultural Resources Inventory BPA 1692589 Schwab 2019 Snohomish District FYI Priority None 1.6 km (1 mi.) Poles, Skagit and Snohomish northeast Counties, Washington Trinity �\ Page 17 Consultants A& Westland NADB# Reference Report Title Cultural Materials Distance and Identified* Direction from API A Cultural Resources Assessment for the Redevelopment of 604 E 1693725 Baldwin 2019 Gilman Avenue(TPN: None 1.1 km (0.67 mi.)north 31050100302200),Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington Archaeological Investigation Report: Pilchuck Village Project(Parcels 1694059 Bush 2020 00769800000600 and None ( mi.) 00793300002801),Arlington, southwest Snohomish County Washington Archaeological Assessment for the 0.9 1694591 Iversen and Lux Project,Arlington, Snohomish 45SN766 southwest (wesstt mi.) Osiensky 2020 County, Washington so A Cultural Resource Assessment of the Proposed Septic System 1695629 Berry 2021 Upgrades at 21202 891 Ave NE None 0.4 km (0.23 mi.)east (TPN 00830700000300),Arlington, Washington A Cultural Resources Assessment of 1697951 Baldwin et al. the Amber Grove Development(TPN None 1.5 km (0.95 mi.) 2023 31051400101800),Arlington, southwest Snohomish County, Washington Archaeological Investigation Report: Parcels 31051100304000; Hawthorne and 1.1 km (0.68 mi.) 1698777 Humphries 2019 31051100400700, near 204th None southwest Avenue,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington Key:NADB=National Archaeological Database *Within 1.6 km(1 mi.)of the API 4.2 Previously Recorded Archaeological Resources A total of seven archaeological resources have been documented within 1.6 km (1 mi.)of the API (Table 4). Three of the previously recorded resources (45SN486, 45SN766, and 45SN879) contain precontact lithic artifacts, none of which have been evaluated for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The assemblage at one of these sites (45SN766) includes a bifacially flaked artifact exhibiting characteristics (material, size, bifacial edge, cortex and patina) consistent with Olcott Phase artifacts, suggesting the site represents an Olcott occupation (8000 to 5000 BP). The Olcott artifact and a projectile point base were identified within the relatively intact B-horizon but the remaining lithics were observed in disturbed upper sediments. Iversen and Osiensky (2020) concluded that the identified artifacts lie within secondary subsurface contexts (i.e., the integrity of the observed deposits was compromised); however, there remains the possibility that unidentified discrete pockets of intact cultural deposits exist nearby. The remaining four previously recorded resources are Historic-period sites associated with agriculture and/or homesteading activities; two have been determined not eligible (45SN891 and 45SN892) and one Trinity �\ Page 18 Consultants � WestLand has not been evaluated for NRHP eligibility (45SN391). The Teager/Weimer Site (45SN409) contains a privy feature and over 130 items of architectural and domestic refuse dating between the 1890s and 1930s. The site is eligible for listing in the NRHP with recovered artifacts and soil samples being curated at the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture in Seattle, Washington (Gillis and Carrilho 2006). Table 3. Previously Recorded Archaeological Resources Within 1.6 km (1 mi.)of the API Smithsonian# Type and Description Eligibility Distance and direction from API Historic Agriculture; drainage ditch, 45SN391 part of an irrigation network(ca. Not Evaluated 0.9 km (0.58 mi)northeast 1890-1910) Historic Debris Scatter; 130+ items 45SN409 of architectural and domestic refuse Eligible 1.6 km (1 mi)northwest and 1 privy feature(ca. 1890s- 1930s) 45SN486 Precontact Isolate; basalt thumbnail Not Evaluated 1.1 km (0.71 mi)south scraper Precontact Lithic Material; sparse 45SN766 subsurface scatter of lithic debitage, Not Evaluated 0.9 km (0.54 mi)southwest 1 projectile point, 1 utilized flake, and FMR 45SN879 Precontact Lithic Scatter; sparse Not Evaluated 1.6 km (0.97 mi)northeast subsurface scatter of 3 lithic flakes Historic Agriculture; Denovan field 45SN891 drainage ditch system channeling Not Eligible 0.7 km (0.47 mi) northeast Eagle Creek 45SN892 Historic Road; one lane graded 2- Not Eligible 0.5 km (0.29 mi)northeast track dirt road segment 4.3 Cemeteries One cemetery has been documented within the 1.6 km (1 mi.) search radius. The Old Pioneer Cemetery (45SN0523), located 1 km (0.64 mi)to the northwest, was the first cemetery in Arlington and was platted in 1902 on land owned by Eva L. Clum. By 1912, the cemetery closed and was eventually abandoned by its owners (Fiege 2009). In 1989, local resident Harry Yost began caring for the cemetery until his death in the early 1990s. Upon the death of Ms. Clum in 1944, no heirs claimed the parcel containing the cemetery.The City of Arlington assumed the land in 2008 (Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts 2008)and is currently maintaining the cemetery. 4.4 Built Environment No standing structures are present in the API; however, approximately 720 built-environment resources have been documented within the 1 mi. search radius, only one of which has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP or Washington Heritage Register(WHIR).The historic Seattle, Lake Shore, and Eastern Trinity �\ Page 19 Consultants A& Westland Railway, constructed in 1887, is located less than 0.9 km (0.6 mi.)to the west-northwest. Operating under the current owner, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway, the historic resource was recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criterion A for the role it played in the development of Arlington, and for its role as a major regional railroad line serving northwest Washington (Smits et al. 2005). 4.4.1 Assessor's Data According to the Snohomish County Online Property Information (SCOPI)web application, the east portion of the API (parcel 31051200200400) has been owned and maintained by the PHD#3 since 2001. The property has remained undeveloped with the parcel being zoned for land and improvement use(Snohomish County Assessor 2025).The westernmost portion (parcel 31051200202700)was purchased in 2005 by the PHD#3 and is zoned under the same property category (land and improvements), currently in use as a parking lot(Snohomish County Assessor 2025). 4.5 Historic Maps and Aerial Imagery The 1875 GLO survey plat depicts no natural or cultural features within the current API (USSG 1875). According to the Master Title Plat and GLO survey records, Allen Forshee obtained a patent (#WAOAA 068774)for the SW'/4 NW'/4 of Section 12,T31 N, RSE, and adjacent land in the N '/2 of Section 11, totaling 160 acres (GLO 1883). By 1910, Forshee's 160-acre homesteading claim was divided into several smaller parcels, ranging from 8 to 20 acres, with the current API within a 20-acre parcel identified with owner Hans Bertilson (Anderson Map Company[Anderson] 1910; Figure 3).Anderson's 1910 Plat Book of Snohomish County and the 1911 USGS quadrangle also depict a network of roads and railways throughout the area as more homesteaders claimed more public land, including roads running along present-day 212th Street NE and Stillaguamish Avenue, as well as an unnamed structure in the current parking lot immediately northwest of the API. The 1927 Metsker atlas for the county shows F. Vauldersitne as the owner of the 20-acre parcel and a transmission line approximately 500 ft. east of the API labeled "Puget SD Power and Light Line" following the route of the present-day transmission lines (Metsker 1927). The 1934 and 1952 Kroll atlas' lists Sarah Van Iderstine as the owner of the same parcel (Kroll 1934, 1952) and Metsker maps between 1960 and 1975 show Floyd L. Langdon as the owner(Metsker 1956, 1975). Historic aerial photography shows the growth of agricultural (e.g., farming, ranching, and logging) activity with more and more residential and business development in the vicinity of the API (Historic Aerials 2025). The 1954 aerial photograph also shows a few small structures and an entry road immediately northwest of the API, likely the same development depicted on the 1910 Anderson map. By 1969, the project vicinity included the Cascade Valley Hospital (to the west) and the athletic field at Haller Middle School (to the northwest)along present-day Stillaguamish Avenue. Trinity �\ Page20 Consultants � WestLand 4.6 DAHP Archaeological Risk Assessment Model DAHP has developed a comprehensive archaeological risk assessment model for the probability of encountering Precontact and Historic-period cultural resources across the state of Washington. These probabilities are calculated using information derived from two general sources: (1)data derived from ethnographic studies and archaeological investigations conducted prior to model development; and (2) a consideration of the relationship between these recorded sites and various environmental factors such as proximity to water, elevation, and slope (Kauhi 2009). The DAHP's model uses five categories for predictions: Low Risk, Moderately Low Risk, Moderate Risk, High Risk, and Very High Risk. The model predicts a moderate risk of encountering archaeological features or deposits within the API. Trinity �\ Page21 Con sult ants West Land ZI , 1otvi 54 OAP 8e r t99 = .71 33.00 ; „ _ A0 Geo. CIO � � v � 0 3 ' A a Co CA 4 4� All, ;2 , A;Ot 13c �4cOC e s ! 40 fC, T31 N, R5E,a Portion of Section 12, Snohomish County,Washington, Legend Map Source:Township 31 North,Range 5 East.W.M.,Edgecomb,Sisco 1910 Q API Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 1 ON N 0 750 1,500 Feet Jv ` Engineering& WestLand Environmental 250 50Meters Services Figure 3. 1910 Anderson Map Company Page 22 5.0 ANTICIPATED FINDS Based on a review of the background information presented above, including the distance to water resources, sites previously recorded on similar landforms in the area, and the DAHP's predictive model, WestLand initially anticipated a high potential for encountering archaeological resources in the API. After taking into consideration the more recent disturbances that have impacted the landscape, such as agricultural land use and commercial development, as well as proximity to road construction and expansive urban development, WestLand subsequently reduced this expectation to moderate. Cultural materials identified at precontact archaeological sites in proximity to the API include chipped stone tools and associated debris and varying quantities of FMR. Precontact artifacts within the API may include isolated stone or bone tools related to hunting or processing activities; lithic debris associated with the manufacture and maintenance of these tools; processing features, such as hearths, identified by the presence of FMR, charcoal, and/or possibly faunal and floral remains. Ethnographic and historic Native American cultural materials could include similar kinds of archaeological materials. Historic Euroamerican cultural materials would likely be related to irrigation and farming practices or perhaps to early industry in the area (including personal items and metal fragments or machinery pieces) . Personal items may include objects such as glass or ceramic beads or vessels, clothing (e.g., buttons), or iron tools.Cultural materials could also be deposits and features associated with agriculture or homesteads, including household dumps containing ceramics, glass, and other domestic items. Trinity �\ Page23 Consultants A& WestLand 6.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 6.1 Survey Methods Westland archaeologists conducted fieldwork on August 2 and 13, 2025, that included a combination of surface and subsurface survey techniques. WestLand Field Director Jamy McLean, MS, and Field Technicians Karl Bloomberg and Dalton Bush, examined the ground surface for artifacts and other evidence of cultural activity by walking transects spaced at intervals no greater than 20 m (66 ft.) across the API. Ground exposures (e.g., ditches, root tips) encountered in or outside of transects were examined closely for the presence of subsurface features or cultural materials. Due to the potential for buried cultural deposits, shovel test probes (STPs)measuring approximately 40 cm in diameter were excavated at intervals ranging between 20 m and 25 m (66 ft. and 82 ft.) in areas exhibiting minimal ground disturbance and no marked utilities. All STPs were excavated to at least 55 centimeters below surface (cmbs) with hand shovels, and spoils from each were screened through quarter-inch hardware mesh. STP locations were documented and spatially recorded using ArcGIS Field Maps, and observations of surface disturbances, topography, vegetation, and soil matrix characteristics (including soil color, which was tested using Munsell charts) were recorded in a standard field notebook. High-resolution digital photographs were taken of each completed STP and throughout the API to record both surface conditions and the surrounding topography. All field notes and photographs are on file at WestLand's Mukikteo office. 6.2 Survey Results The API is situated on a grassy, gently sloping (2-10 degrees to the southeast)field on a dissected glacial drift plain (Figures 4 and 5). The API has been impacted by Historic-period and modern land use and surrounding development, including plowing (evident in the STP profiles), grading (berm construction along the south and east perimeters and through the middle north of the property), road construction and maintenance along the north, east, and southern boundaries, utility installation (particularly a gas line in the north), and construction of a parking lot and helicopter pad (Figure 6). Vegetation consists mainly of a thick covering of domestic grass with ornamental trees planted along the parking lot and the north and east sidewalks. The large berm in the middle of the property has been overtaken by Himalayan blackberry (see Figure 5). Ground visibility throughout the API is less than 5 %. Trinity �\ Page24 Consultants A& WestLand t: n Figure 4. Overview of south portion of API (parking lot at left); view east. F WE e Figure 5. Overview of north portion of API (central berm at right); view east. Trinity �\ Page25 Consultants A Westland Figure 6. Overview of north portion of API with previous disturbance related to utility installation along the adjacent parking lot and sidewalk in foreground and residential development to the east and southeast; view southeast. WestLand excavated a total of 17 STPs with hand shovels to a maximum depth of 100 curbs within the API (Figure 7; STP table provided in Appendix B). Observed sediments are generally consistent in the south portion of the API (STPs 1-11)and consist of a 25-30 cm thick Ap-Horizon (plow zone)of dark brown silty loam overlying a dark yellowish-brown B-Horizon of silty loam above a B/C-Horizon of light brownish gray silty loam (Figure 8).The STPs in the north portion of the API (STPs 12-17)exhibited evidence of previous subsurface disturbance (i.e., mixed soils and/or fill materials) in the upper part of the profile (Figure 9). Gravel content varied widely(less than 15 %to more than 60 %)throughout the API but generally increased with depth. Divergence from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service mapped soil characteristics is to be expected due to variation in local topography and the results of Historic-period and modern land use (see Topography and Geology section above). Trinity �\ Page26 Consultants A& WestLand Path:G.\14000s\14065WRC\ArlingtonMedFacilityWrcGlSpro\FrontMatter 14065.aprx:4 Results Date:8/27/2025 User:DanVanEssen ^^^777 1 � I �• is, _ , t I. M_ edical Center Dr 016 <� 1A V.. . 015 014 013 A AV U 09 •1 5 06 •7 8 O , 04 03 02 01 f 212th St NE f i T31 N, RSE,a Portion of Section 12, Snohomish County,Washington, Legend Image source:7/16/2024 O Negative STP Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N • Positive STP O API N 0 50 100 Feet Jv ` Engineering& WestLand Environmental 0 15 3 Meters Services Figure 7. Results of survey Page 27 �� �►. � 1 Sri tl r � ar?\�'� .e �4 y►� n. `q 6 "— A s!1 ,... 'Y 17 Iw 1, * ZdL. AL r . Figure 8. STP 2 profile at 70 cmbs. to L!w rt ► y!P' ic* �luC ,f �. is tr ' ♦��f . �w # fact_ ' r�ti .ittl� ix � �' i it �. i '1`�.'aY. 4..(r♦sI`�_.,L'ri.'�*1 � 1al51' -4''+♦ n -� - s ��t:/ � �',lT L�.,±��'fyLi��, '+ti a Tt y!''e•d`�``d" `/d►d ij � � i 1, � w Y� �j'(�► fl 1!►�� I � tr 1 a� 9 �1 n. sK '� �ri.`.,a:'.�.';'• �`. !` e1t 'i!, !R! `� �t�Qs •�r 'L: w ' Figure 9. STP 12 profile at 100 cmbs. Trinit �\ Page28 Consultantsy Westland WestLand observed several pieces of modern and possibly Historic-period debris in five of the STPs. Modern debris such as concrete, slag, and amber vessel glass was noted in the north portion of the API, in the plow zone less than 40 cmbs in STPs 12 and 14; crushed gravel was observed to 70 cmbs in STP 15. Debris identified in the plow zone (to a maximum of 25 cmbs) within the south portion of the API (STPs 7 and 10)appears to be historic in nature due to signs of degradation, but did not have temporally diagnostic characteristics. Items in STP 7 included a short length of thick gauge wire ('/4-inch diameter) and a blue glazed fragment of earthenware that appears to be from a cradle or spout(Figure 10).Archaeologists noted two fragments of earthenware in STP 10 (Figure 11): one is a utilitarian, white glazed fragment of a bowl or plate; the other is more refined in manufacture and appears to be from a bowl or cup. The second item has a white base glaze on the interior with light gray, hand painted decoration, while the exterior is painted a variable shade of blue with gold filagree decor. The domestic debris identified in STPs 7 and 10 may be associated with the structure(s) depicted on historic maps and aerial imagery more than 55 m (180 ft.) northwest of the API. Upon further analysis, WestLand did not record the sparse assemblage as an archaeological site due to the uncertainty of the origin of materials, which is likely a secondary deposit resulting from ground disturbance associated with construction of the parking lot. In addition, no direct association is evident from background research between the materials identified and the residences or businesses of the surrounding area. 1 „l 'rt� A , III IIII IIII lui un it I illl Ilil i„ ;rjll!IIIII�,L il�:;i; ...,, i�itll�hllll!IIIIu!�Iltillll!�IIIIIIIII�IIIIII111�1411IIIII�IIIIIIIII�Illillllllllllilil!ill•IIII I � I ll2 1,3y 14 ll'= llf 1 -7 118 1 '2Z III 13C E M17.513836 7 8 '9 11 1 i II�III 1IltIIIII�IIII�IIHlllli�l '•�'"�1��'�f1111�1JIllllll�1111 I IIII I Ili I IIII II(II ll ialli SI All , Figure 10. Plow zone artifacts identified in STIR 7(0-24 cmbs). Trinity �\ Page29 ConsuLtants � WestLand t'� .h'#sle Oe 4 • j 7�??jy'�1 Me at ' S.°p'o 1 9 i IIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIII Illl�ifllf�lll�llll Ilillllll METRIC I 2 31 4 5 II��III�� IIIIIIIII Ii�lllll�IIIIIIIIII III�Iilll METRIC 1 2 3- 4 5 Figure 11. Plow zone artifacts from STP-10. 7.0 SUMMARYAND RECOMMENDATIONS Westland conducted surface and subsurface field survey, excavating 17 STPs to depths ranging from 55 to 100 cmbs, and observed materials consisting of modern debris and temporally undiagnostic deposits resulting from ground disturbance associated with construction of the parking lot located immediately west of the API. No archaeological resources were identified that may be eligible for listing in the NRHP. Based on the results of background research and field observations of previous ground disturbance, WestLand anticipates that the API has a low probability for remaining intact precontact, Ethnographic period, and historic resources that may be eligible for listing in the NRHP and recommends no further cultural resources work for this project. If project plans change to include areas not covered by this survey, then additional study may be required. WestLand recommends that all ground-disturbing activities be conducted under the inadvertent discovery plan (IDP) provided in Appendix C. The IDP lays out procedures to follow if archaeological deposits or human skeletal remains are inadvertently discovered during construction. It should be made available to all construction crews working within the API, and a copy should be present on the job site during any ground- disturbing work. Trinity �\ Page 30 Consultants A& WestLand 8.0 REFERENCES Ames, Kenneth. M., and Herbert D. G. Maschner 1999 Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. Thames and Hudson, New York. Ames, Kenneth, Cameron Smith,William Cornett, Elizabeth Sobel, Stephen Hamilton,John Wolf,and Doria Raetz 1999 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996). Wapato Valley Archaeology Project Report No. 7. Portland State University, Portland, Oregon. Anderson Map Company (Anderson) 1910 Plat Book of Snohomish County, Washington. Electronic document, http://www.historicmapworks.com/Atlas/US/20620, accessed July 31, 2025. Avey, Mike n.d. Fluted Point Occurrences in Washington State. On file, DAHP, Olympia. Baenen, James 1981 Stillaguamish, Snohomish, Snoqualmie, and Duwamish. In Inventory of Native American Religious Use, Practices, Localities and Resources:Study Area on the Mt. Baker-Snogalmie National Forest Washington State, edited by Astrida R. Blukis Onat and Jan I. Hollenbeck, pp. 369-471. Institute of Cooperative Research, Seattle. Blukis Onat,Astrida 1987 Resource Protection Planning Process: Identification of Prehistoric Archaeological Resources in the Northern Puget Sound Study Unit. On file, Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Blukis Onat, Astrida R., Maury E. Morgenstein, Phillip D. LeTourneau, Robert P. Stone, Jerre Kosta, and Paula Johnson 2001 Archaeological Investigations at stuwe yugw, Site 45SN464, Tolt River, King County, Washington. BOAS, Inc., Seattle, Washington. Prepared for Seattle Public Utilities. Bruseth, Nels 1926 Indian Stories and Legends of the Stillaguamish, Sauks, and Allied Tribes. Arlington Times Press, Arlington, Washington. Trinity �\ Page 31 Consultants A& Westland Carlson, Roy L. 1990 Cultural Antecedents. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 60-69. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Carlson, Roy L., and Luke Dalla Bona 1996 Early Human Occupation in British Columbia. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver. Chatters, James, Jason Cooper, Phillippe LeTourneau, and Lara Rooke 2011 Understanding Olcott: Data Recovery at 45SN28 and 45SN303, Snohomish County, Washington. AMEC Earth and Environmental, Bothell. On file, DAHP, Olympia. City of Arlington 2025 History of Arlington. Electronic document, https://arlingtonwa.gov/463/History-of-Arlington, accessed November 22, 2024. Clague, John J., and Thomas S. James 2002 History and Isostatic Effects of the Last Ice Sheet in Southern British Columbia. Quaternary Science Reviews 21:71-87. Cooper, Jason B., Tim Gerrish, Tyler McWilliams, and Jillian Hahnlen 2014 Sunset Fish Passage and Energy Project (FERC No. 14295)—Study Plan 10: Final Historic Properties Study Technical Report, Snohomish County, Washington. Prepared for Snohomish County PUD.AMEC Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc., Bothell, Washington. Dampf, Steven, and Eileen Heideman 2021 Cultural Resources Assessment for the 9102 SR 530 Surface Mine Project, Snohomish County, Washington. Tierra Right of Way Services, Ltd., Everett, Washington. Prepared for Miles Sand & Gravel Company, Puyallup, Washington. Easterbrook, D. J. 2003 Cordilleran Ice Sheet Glaciation of the Puget Lowland and Columbia Plateau and Alpine Glaciation of the North Cascade Range, Washington. In Western Cordillera and Adjacent Areas, Geological Society of America Field Guide 4, edited by T.W. Swanson, pp.137-157. Geological Society of America, Boulder. Trinity �\ Page 32 Consultants A& Westland Fiege, Gale 2009 Once-forgotten Arlington cemetery a source of history, Electronic document, https://www.herald net.com/news/once-forgotten-arl i ngton-cemetery-a-sou rce-of-history/, accessed July 31, 2025. Find a Grave 2025a Charles W. Swesey. Electronic document, https://www.findagrave.com/memoria1/63659733/charles w-swesev, accessed May 15, 2025. 2025b Caleb H. Swesey. Electronic document, https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/54818613/caleb horace-swesev, accessed Franklin, J. F., and C. T. Dyrness 1988 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. Gillis, N., and Y. Carrilho 2006 45SN409. State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form. On file, Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Greengo, R. E. (editor) 1983 Prehistoric Places on the Southern Northwest Coast. Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, University of Washington, Seattle. Gustafson, C., D. Gilbow, and R. D. Daugherty 1979 The Manis Mastodon Site: Early Man on the Olympic Peninsula. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 3:157-164. Hebda, Richard A. 1995 British Columbia Vegetation and Climate History with Focus on 6 ka BP. Geographie physique et Quaternaire 49(1):55-79. Historic Aerials 2025 Historic Aerials Viewer. Electronic document,https:Hhistoricaerials.com/viewer,accessed July 31,2025. Huggins, E. 1984 Journal of Occurrences at Muck Station (1858 to 1859):A Farm of the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company in Pierce County, Washington Territory. Journal kept by Edward Huggins and others, transcribed by Gary Fuller Reese. On file at the Tacoma Public Library,Tacoma,Washington. Trinity �\ Page 33 Consultants A& Westland Interstate Publishing Company 1906 An Illustrated History of Skagit and Snohomish Counties: Their People, Their Commerce and Their Resources. Interstate Publishing Company, Chicago. Iversen, Dave, and Whitney Osiensky 2020 Archaeological Assessment for the Lux Project, Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington. ASM Affiliates, Inc., Stanwood, Washington. Prepared for Grandview North, LLC,Arlington, Washington. Kauhi, Tonya C. 2009 Washington Statewide Archaeology Predictive Model. Prepared by Geo Engineers, Inc., Tacoma, Washington, prepared for the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Kidd, R. S. 1964 A Synthesis of Western Washington Prehistory from the Perspective of Three Occupational Sites. Unpublished master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle. Kopperl, Robert, Charles Hodges, Christian Miss, Johonna Shea, and Alecia Spooner 2016 Archaeology of King County, Washington:A Context Statement for Native American Archaeological Resources. SWCA Environmental Consultants, Inc., Seattle. Prepared for King County Historic Preservation Program. Kovanen, Dori J., and Don J. Easterbrook 2002 Timing and Extent of Allerod and Younger Dryas Age (ca. 12,500-10,000 14C yr B.P.) Oscillations of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet in the Fraser Lowland, Western North America. Quaternary Research 57(2):208-224. Kroll Map Company 1934 Atlas of Snohomish County, Wash.,T. 31 N., R. 5 E. Electronic document, https:Hhistoricmapworks.com/Map/US/31600/Page+14++Arllington++Lakewood++English++Edgeco mb++Sisco/Snohomish+County+1934/Washington/, accessed August 4, 2025 1952 Atlas of Snohomish County, Wash.,T. 31 N., R. 5 E. Electronic document, https:Hhistoricmapworks.com/Map/US/488898/Page+14+Township+31+N++Range+5+E++English+L akewood++Edgecom b++Sti mson++Arl ington+Airport/Snohomish+County+1943+Revised+1952NVas hington/,accessed August 4,2025 Kruckeberg,Arthur R. 2002 The Natural History of Puget Sound Country. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Trinity �\ Page 34 Consultants A& Westland Lane, Barbara 1973 Anthropological Report on the Identity, Treaty Status and Fisheries of the Stillaguamish Indians. On file, Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Larrison, Earl J. 1976 Mammals of the Northwest. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle. Larsen, Susan C. (editor), P.Arthur, and Camille A. Mather 2016 Archaeological Survey and Evaluation for the Proposed Island Crossing Healing Center,Arlington, Snohomish County, Washington. Caldera Archaeology, Bellingham, Washington. Prepared for the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians. Larson, L. L., and D. E. Lewarch (editors) 1995 The Archaeology of West Point, Seattle, Washington:4,000 Years of Hunter-Fisher-Gatherer Land Use in Southern Puget Sound. Larson Anthropological and Archaeological Services, Gig Harbor, Washington. Lasmanis, Raymond 1991 The Geology of Washington. Rocks and Minerals 66(4):262-277. Lawler,Andrew 2011 Pre-Clovis Mastodon Hunters Make a Point. Science 334:302. Lewarch, Dennis E., Leonard A. Forsman,Amy E. Dugas, and Lynn L. Larson 1999 Archaeological Resources Management Plan for Naval Weapons Station, Seal Beach Detachment, Port Hadlock, Jefferson County, Washington. LAAS Technical Report #99-03. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services Limited, Gig Harbor. Submitted to EDAW, Incorporated, Seattle. Prepared for Engineering Field Activity, Northwest, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Poulsbo, Washington. Matson, R. G., and G. C. Coupland 1995 The Prehistory of the Northwest Coast.Academic Press, San Diego. Mattson, John L. 1985 Puget Sound Prehistory: Postglacial Adaptations in the Puget Sound Basin with Archaeological Implications for a Solution to the "Cascade Problem." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. On file, University Microfilms International,Ann Arbor. Trinity �\ Page 35 Consultants A& Westland McKee, Bates 1972 Cascadia: The Geologic Evolution of the Pacific Northwest. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, New York. Meltzer, D. J., and R. C. Dunnell 1987 Fluted Points from the Pacific Northwest. Current Research in the Pleistocene 4:64-67. Metsker, Chas. F. 1927 Metskers Atlas of Snohomish County, Washington. Electronic document, https://historicmapworks.com/Map/US/699484/Township+31+N++Range+5+E+W+M+++Arlington ++English+Sta+++Stimson+Crossing++Sisco++Edgecomb/Snohomish+County+1927/Washingto n/, accessed April 4, 2025. 1975 Metskers Atlas of Snohomish County, Washington. Electronic document, https://historicmapworks.com/Map/US/699573/Township+31+N++Range+5+E+W+M+++Arlington /Snohomish+County+1975/Washington/, accessed April 4, 2025. Metsker, Thomas. C. 1960 Metskers Atlas of Snohomish County, Washington. Electronic document https://historicmapworks.com/Map/US/55592/Page+035+++Arlington/Snohomish+County+1960+ Published+by+Metskers/Washington/, accessed August 5, 2025. Miss, Christian J. and Sarah K. Campbell 1991 Prehistoric Cultural Resources of Snohomish County, Washington. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc., Seattle. Prepared for the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Nelson, C. M. 1990 Prehistory of the Puget Sound Region. In Northwest Coast, edited by W. Suttles, pp. 481-484. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Orr, Elizabeth L., and William N. Orr 1996 Geology of the Pacific Northwest. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York, New York. Porter, S. C., and T. W. Swanson 1998 Radiocarbon Age Constraints on Rates of Advance and Retreat of the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet During the Last Glaciation. Quaternary Research 50:205-213. Trinity �\ Page 36 Consultants A& Westland Riddle, Margaret 2006 Snohomish County—Thumbnail History. Electronic document available at www.historylink.orp/index.cfm?DisplayPage=out,out.cfm&file id=7877, accessed Augusta, 2025. Ruby, Robert H., and John A. Brown 1992 A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma. Smith, Marian 1941 The Coast Salish of Puget Sound. American Anthropologist 43:197-211. Smits, Nicholas J., Terry L. Ozbun, J. Gregory Smith, David V. Ellis, Judith A. Chapman, Jason M. Allen, and Elizabeth J. O'Brien 2005 Cultural Resource Survey of Northwest Pipeline Corporation's Capacity Replacement Project, Western Washington. Addendum Five: Supplemental Surveys of Extra Workspaces, Access Roads, Dewatering Areas, and Pipeyards. Report No. 1478. Archaeological Investigations Northwest, Inc., Portland, Oregon. Prepared for Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Houston, Texas. Snohomish Conservation District 2017 Action Plan for Riparian Protection and Restoration for the Stillaguamish Confluence, French Creek, and Lower/Middle Pilchuck River. Available at: https://staticl.squarespace.com/ static/54933166e4b00173e5357840/t/5a60f6e7c8302582f6c5c37b/1516304111832/Action+Plan+ for+Integrated+Riparian+Stewardship+in+the+Stillaguamish+and+Snohomish+basins_Final.pdf. Accessed August 15, 2025. Snohomish County Assessor 2025 Snohomish County Online Property Information (SCOPI). Electronic document, https://scopi.snoco.orq/Htm15Viewer/Index.htmI?configBase=https://scopi.snoco.orq/Geocortex/E ssentials/REST/sites/SCOPI/viewers/SCOPI/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default, accessed August 5, 2025. Washington State Administrative Office of the Court 2008 Case Number 082061084, City of Arlington (Plaintiff) vs. Eva L. Clum, deceased, her heirs, successors and assigns (Defendant). Washington Courts. On file with DAHP, accessed July 31, 2025. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians 2020 About Us. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians website. Available at: https://www.stillaguamish.com/about-us/.Accessed August 5, 2025. Trinity �\ Page 37 Consultants A Westland Suttles, Wayne, and Barbara Lane 1990 Southern Coast Salish. In Northwest Coast, edited by Wayne Suttles, pp. 485-502. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, William Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. US Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2025 Web Soil Survey, Pierce County Area, Washington (WA653). Electronic resource, available at https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed April 4, 2025. US Geological Survey(USGS) 1900 1:125,000 Scale Topographic Map, Tacoma, Washington Quadrangle, 1945 Edit. Electronic document available at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv browse.pl?id=ce873cbd5bb32421628ffcc1e713cb0f, accessed April 4, 2025. 1944 1:62,500 Scale Topographic Map, Tacoma, Washington Quadrangle, 1944 Edit. Electronic document, available at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv browse.pl?id=28d7d527ded17c9d404780ba06f86a8f, accessed April 4, 2025. 1961 1:24,000 Scale Topographic Map, Puyallup, Washington Quadrangle, 1995 Edit. Electronic document, available at https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ht- bin/tv browse.pl?id=1 acf1 df5dc41 cd5172724071 5bf41 5fd, accessed April 4, 2025. 2011 1:24,000 Scale Topographic Map, Puyallup, Washington Quadrangle. Electronic document, available at https:Hngmdb.usgs.gov/ht-bin/tv browse.pl?id=1acf1df5dc41cd51727240715bf415fd, accessed May 4, 2025. 2023 Significant Lahars at Mount Rainier. Electronic resource, https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mountrainier/science/significant-lahars-mount-rainier, accessed May 6, 2025. US Surveyor General (USSG) 1875 Township No. 31 North, Range No. 5 East, Will. Mer., W. T. Electronic document, https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=321150&sid=hv43ic5k.caf#surveyD etailsTabindex=1, accessed August 4, 2025. Waters, Michael R., Thomas W. Stafford Jr., H. Gregory McDonald, Carl Gustafson, Morten Rasmussen, Enrico Cappellini, Jesper V. Olsen, Damian Szklarczyk, Lars Juhl Jensen, M. Thomas, P. Gilbert, and Eske Willerslev 2011 Pre-Clovis Mastodon Hunting 13,800 Years Ago at the Manis Site, Washington. Science 334(6054):351-353. Trinity �\ Page 38 Consultants A& Westland APPENDIX A SCHEMATIC FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 0 n w w �° • zUz 0 \�\ ` � w U z .` \ C/) W Q �\ zQz o� 0 10' 20' 40' I 4 ` `\ 2E w C0 SCALE-1-20' I I 0 `♦ ` <\ I J J _ � I 9 � � a \ a = 10 °, � `41&FRFE z 19 1 � I 1 I I W A fCL Z ® ❑® I I � O z o I � I I I O C7 —� A PROPOSEMrAREA twW SF.(222 ACC) I P�ex WH/rF �F WA�i IST co I 0 3-STO ss/ A i o RY BLDG 30000 S.F. -------------- ROT ' z I U N ----- 8s' 2 52� 8 "' -- a � Ld" c o L 01 I I c Dcn a N M 15 3 C 'a0 Obi J , iA H r� ,w f0 O N Lfi i °rY � (HO)d (HO)d (HD)d (H9)d (H. (HO)d (HD)d (HO)d (HO)d (HO)d (HO)d (HD)d (HO)4 (HO)d (HO)d (HO)d (HO)d m U N 212TH ST NE E a.� N U APPENDIX B SHOVEL TEST PROBE RESULTS Table 13.1. Shovel Test Probe Results STP Depth Soil Description Cultural Notes Number (cmbs) (depths in cmbs) Materials (depths in cmbs) (depths in cmbs) 0-26: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 26-36: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; 15-35%subangular and 1 80 subrounded pebbles; clear boundary none 0-36; mixed 36-80: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2(dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles; common redox Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-18: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; no gravels; clear boundary 18-30: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; no gravels; clear boundary 2 70 30-45: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2 (dry)silty loam; extremely hard; no gravels; clear none boundary 45-70: Light yellowish brown 2.5 6/4(dry)silty loam; extremely hard; no gravels; heavy redox Terminated due to density and nature of sediments 0-29: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 29-42: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; 15-35% 3 74 subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary none 42-74: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2(dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles; common redox Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-20: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; abrupt boundary 20-45: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; <15% 4 65 subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary none 45-65: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2 (dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles and cobbles; common redox Terminated due to density, cobble impasse Page B1 STP Depth Soil Description Cultural Notes Number (cmbs) (depths in cmbs) Materials (depths in cmbs) (depths in cmbs) 0-31: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 31-73: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; <15% 5 92 subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary none 73-92: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2(dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles and cobbles Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-39: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 39-75: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; 15% 6 80 subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary none chart Mixed, contains charcoal (32-40) 75-80: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2(dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles and cobbles Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-24: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 0-24: Blue 24-94: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; 15% glazed ceramic 7 100 subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary fragment and 94-100: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2 (dry)silty loam; hard; 15-35%subangular and length of thick subrounded pebbles and cobbles gauged wire Terminated due at target depth 0-21: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary Located 1 m west of small 8 63 21-63: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2 (dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 15-35%subangular none round berm and subrounded pebbles and cobbles Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-21: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 9 55 21-55: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; 15-35% none subangular and subrounded pebbles to boulders Terminated due to density, cobble impasse Page B2 STP Depth Soil Description Cultural Notes Number (cmbs) (depths in cmbs) Materials (depths in cmbs) (depths in cmbs) 0-25: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; <15% subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 25-70: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; 35-60% earthenware— glazed e 10 75 subangular and subrounded small pebble to medium cobble, clear boundary earth blue on white 70-75: Light brownish gray 2.5Y 6/2 (dry)silty loam; extremely hard; 35-60%subangular with gold filagree to subrounded small pebble, redox Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-22: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; 15-35% subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 11 71 22-71: Dark yellowish brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; moderate blocky; hard; 15-35% none subangular and subrounded pebbles and cobbles Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-39: Brown 10YR 5/3(dry)silty loam; hard; 60-90%angular and subangular pebbles and cobbles; clear boundary 0-39: Slag and 12 100 39-100: Brown 10YR 4/3 (dry)sandy loam; hard; 60-90%subangular and subrounded modern amber pebbles and cobbles vessel glass Terminated at target depth 0-37: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; hard; 60-90%angular and subangular pebbles and cobbles; clear boundary 13 73 37-73: Brown 10YR 4/3 (dry)very sandy loam; hard; 60-90%subangular and none subrounded pebbles and cobbles Terminated due to cobble impasse 0-36: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; 35-60% angular and subangular pebbles and cobbles; clear boundary 36-78: Brown 10YR 4/3(dry)sandy loam; hard; 35-60%subangular and subrounded 0-36: Golf ball 14 85 pebble to medium cobble, clear boundary and concrete 78-85: Greyish brown 10YR 5/2 sandy loam, 35-60%subangular to subrounded small chunks pebble Terminated due to coble impasse Page B3 STP Depth Soil Description Cultural Notes Number (cmbs) (depths in cmbs) Materials (depths in cmbs) (depths in cmbs) 0-46:Yellowish brown 10YR 5/4 (dry)sandy loam;firm; 35-60%angular to subrounded pebbles and cobbles; clear boundary 15 70 46-70: Brown 10YR 4/3(dry)sand; compact, very hard; 35-60%angular to rounded grave crushed 0-70: imported fill pebbles and cobbles gravel Terminated due to density, cobble impasse 0-43: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)silty loam; moderate granular; hard; 15-35%subangular and subrounded pebbles; clear boundary 16 65 43-65: Brown 10YR 4/3 sandy loam, 15-35%subrounded small pebble to medium asphalt cobble Terminated due to cobble impasse 0-34: Brown 10YR 5/3 (dry)sandy loam;weak granular; firm; 35-60%subrounded and subangular pebbles and cobbles; clear boundary 17 100 34-100: Brown 10YR 4/3 sandy loam; loose; 15-35%subrounded and subangular none pebbles to boulders; common redox Terminated at target depth NOTE:STP=Shovel test probe;cmbs=centimeters below surface Page B4 APPENDIX C INADVERTENT DISCOVERY PLAN APPENDIX C: Inadvertent Discovery Plan CRA for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County Inadvertent Discovery Plan for Cultural Resources Washington state law protects archaeological resources (RCW 27.53, 27.44, and WAC 25-48)and human remains(RCW 68.50)from disturbance or theft. If artifacts or cultural deposits are discovered inadvertently during ground—disturbing activities in the Area of Potential Impacts (API), construction should be immediately stopped. Artifacts and cultural deposits might include, but are not limited to, evidence for precontact activities such as chipped stone tools, chipped stone tool debris, ground stone tools, bone and shell objects, fire-cracked or discolored rocks, concentrations of charcoal and discolored soil, or shell middens. There may also be evidence of Historic period land use or dumping such as structural debris, mechanical items, or concentration of cans, bottles, or other debris (see Photos E.1—E.6 for examples of artifacts and cultural deposits). If there is any question as to whether the finds are cultural, a professional archaeologist may be consulted to verify that the finds are archaeological. The construction supervisor will establish a 20-m (65-foot) buffer area around the discovery to protect the find while it is investigated. The construction supervisor and the landowner will notify the City of Arlington (City). Ground-disturbing work may proceed in other parts of the API, provided it will not affect the cultural discovery. The City, as lead agency for State Environmental Policy Act compliance, will carry out any necessary consultation with the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), affected Tribes, and other interested parties. Inadvertent Discovery Plan for Human Remains If ground-disturbing activities encounter human skeletal remains during the course of construction, then all activity will cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains. The area of the find will be secured and protected from further disturbance until the State provides notice to proceed. The finding of human skeletal remains will be reported to the Snohomish County Medical Examiner(425-438-6200)and the City of Arlington Police Department(360-403-3400) in the most expeditious manner possible. The remains will not be touched, moved, or further disturbed. The coroner will assume jurisdiction over the human skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or non-forensic. If the medical examiner determines the remains are non-forensic, then they will report that finding to the DAHP, who will then take jurisdiction over the remains. The DAHP will notify any appropriate cemeteries and all affected Tribes of the find. The State Physical Anthropologist, Guy Tasa (360-790-1633), will make a determination of whether the remains are Indian or non-Indian and report that finding to any appropriate cemeteries and the affected Tribes. The DAHP will then handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition of the remains. Westland Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. September 2, 2025 1 Page C2 APPENDIX C: Inadvertent Discovery Plan CRA for the Northsound Logistics Center, Snohomish County P lf,�l'�a 7�y �1�'br ► a '�- i J ifs `•,.+... a , k ./ f Y� � r Photo C-1. Shell midden and layered stratigraphy of shell and blackened soil Photo C-2. Examples of stone tools and flaked stone Westland Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. September 2, 2025 Page C3 APPENDIX C: Inadvertent Discovery Plan CRA for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County r y�� Photo C-3. Examples of hearth features and unusual accumulations of rocks, possibly with burnt or charcoal-stained soils Photo C-4. Examples of historic artifacts Westland Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. September 2, 2025 Page C4 APPENDIX C: Inadvertent Discovery Plan CRA for the Arlington Medical Facility Project, Snohomish County 1 � r �,,,f Photo C-5. Examples of historic bottles n i � Photo C-6. Example of a historic building foundation Westland Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. September 2, 2025 Page C5