20230959 Ver 1_BP1-R010 Northampton No NRHP Archaeological Sites Present Form_20230705

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
aalti ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
€4 p
PRESENT FORM t
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project.
` It is not valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult 4
separately with the Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No:
WBS No:
F.A. No:
BP 1-RO10
BP1.R010.1
N/A
Federal Permit Required?
County: Northampton
Document: Federal CE
Funding: ® State ❑ Federal
® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: USACE
Project Description: NCDOT's Division 1 proposes to replace Bridge No. 20 on Creeksville Road (SR
1504) over Potecasi Creek in Northampton County. Bridge No. 20 was built in 1975 and has been
selected to be replaced. Although Preliminary Design Plans have not been developed, an Area of Interest
was submitted in order to facilitate the environmental review process at this stage. The Area of Interest is
centered on the bridge structure and measures about 1,423 feet long and about 160 feet wide. As part of
the submittal_ no easements will be needed_ and no additional ROW will be reauired: therefore_ the Area
of Potential Effects (APE) is restricted to the existing ROW alone Creeksville Road (SR 1504). Overall
though, the Area of Interest encompasses about 5.12 acres, inclusive of the existing roadway, the structure
itself, and any modern development.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed the subject
project and determined:
® There are no National Register listed or eligible ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present within the
project's area of potential effects. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
® No subsurface archaeological investigations were required for this project.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources considered
eligible for the National Register.
❑ All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
This project was accepted on Tuesday, January 11, 2022. A review of the databases maintained by the
Office of State Archaeology (OSA) was also performed/received that same day. An archaeological
survey has not been conducted within the vicinity of the proposed project, and no archaeological sites
have been recorded within one (1) mile of the Area of Interest. Digital copies of HPO's maps (Galatia
Quadrangle) as well as the HPOWEB GIS Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) were initially reviewed
on Monday, January 24, 2022. Although there are no known/documented historic architectural resources
located within the Area of Interest, intact and significant archaeological deposits associated with Grant's
Mill (later known as Deloatch Mill, an early 19t1i-century grist and sawmill in operation until the 1920s as
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
1 of 7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
a flour mill) may be anticipated within the footprint of the proposed project. In addition, topographic
maps, historic maps (NCMaps website), USDA soil survey maps, and aerial photographs were utilized
and inspected to gauge environmental factors that may have contributed to historic or prehistoric
settlement within the project limits, and to assess the slope as well as the level of modern, agricultural,
hydrological, and other erosive -type disturbances within and surrounding the Area of Interest.
As stated in the Survey Required Form, "This is a State -funded project for which a Federal permit is
anticipated. Based on the request, permanent/temporary drainage and/or utility easements should not be
necessary, nor should additional ROW be required. However, the Area of Interest appears to be drawn in
a way so that any potential activities that may take place beyond NCDOT's existing ROW can be
covered. If there were no Federal nexus for this project, please know that we would be in compliance
with NC GS 121-12a, since there are no eligible (i.e., National Register -listed) archaeological resources
located within the Area of Interest that would require our attention.
From an environmental perspective, the Area of Interest falls within a rural setting in the Coastal
Plain physiographic region of northeastern North Carolina. The Area of Interest consists of three (3) soil
types, Wehadkee loam, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded (Wh), Craven fine sandy loam, 14% slopes
(CrB), and Craven fine sandy loam, 4-10% slopes (CrQ, over two-thirds of which are classified as
frequently flooded and poorly drained and would, thus, suggest a very low potential for intact
archaeological materials to be present. However, the potential for early 10-century components
associated with Grant's Mill outweighs the prehistoric archaeological probability based on soil
characteristics. In particular. 19t1i-century deeds mention that the dam for the mill forms part of one of the
roads leading from Jackson to Murfreesboro. The 1833 Brazier Map also indicates the presence of a mill
at this crossing of Potecasi Creek. Therefore, mill remnants may be present within or immediately
adjacent to the existing ROW. The Office of State Archaeology (OSA) has not reviewed any projects
within the vicinity (1-mile radius) for environmental compliance so there is a lack of comparative
materials on which recommendations can be based. Within five (5) miles of the proposed project,
NCDOT's Archaeology Team has reviewed at least five (5) transportation -related projects for
environmental compliance under the Programmatic Agreement (PA) with the State Historic Preservation
Office (NC-HPO). No archaeological surveys were recommended for three of the five projects. An
archaeological survey, however, was recommended and is currently under contract for the replacement of
Bridge No. 17 on Doolittle Mill Road (TIP# BPI-R018 [PA 21-11-0034]). In comparison, the proposed
project is very similar to BPI-R018 in that both may have (or do have) 10-century mill components
present within or adjacent to the existing ROW. Results from the Doolittle Mill Road bridge project are
still pending.
Despite some of the information presented here, an archaeological survey is recommended based
on the potential presence of early 10-century mill components. Therefore, a visual inspection of the
Area of Interest should be conducted, followed then by systematic archaeological excavations within
areas of moderate to high historic archaeological probability if feasible. All cemeteries (if any) should
also be properly recorded and delineated if any occur within or adjacent to the Area of Interest. None of
the property within the Area of Interest that would require further investigation is owned by the State of
North Carolina so a State Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) permit should not be
necessary. Should the description of this project change or design plans be made available prior to
construction, additional consultation regarding archaeology will be required."
Field investigations for the proposed project occurred on Wednesday, June 8, 2022, and were comprised
of an intensive pedestrian reconnaissance to confirm the level of disturbance within the existing ROW
and whether potentially significant archaeological resources could still be present immediately adjacent to
the existing roadway. The entire extent of the Area of Interest was visually inspected in order to
determine the need for and placement of any excavations. The western third of the project area consisted
of manicured yardspace and fallow fields running up against the ditchline to either side of Creeksville
Road (SR 1504). Within this section, the existing ROW equates to the top cut of the ditchline, thus
suggesting a disturbed context for archaeological resources to be present. The remaining portion of the
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
2of7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
project area consisted entirely of the 60-foot wide road embankment (which equates to the existing ROW)
and the wetlands to either side of the roadway. There is no ditchline along the section of the project
within the drainage for Potecasi Creek. The embankment to either side of the roadway gently slopes
away from the edge of pavement (EOP) for a distance of about 20 feet at which point the topography
essentially drops 6 feet in elevation to wetlands (on the north side) and overly saturated soils (on the south
side). Using LiDAR imagery, areas of subtle topographical changes along the corridor were closely
inspected, namely at the location of Bridge No. 20 as well as the extreme Northeast corner of the Area of
Interest. In addition, given the potential for historic mill components to be present somewhere in the area,
the vicinity of Bridge No. 21 (farther to the east along Creeksville Road) was also inspected. Although
beyond the limits for the proposed project, topographical features in this particular location were
intriguing; however, no conclusive evidence was found indicating the presence of historic mill
components. Therefore, based on the environmental setting and soil conditions as well as the constrictive
and limited nature of the APE, the placement of shovel tests was deemed not necessary; nothing of
interest was observed within the APE or in the field, in general.
A deed trace for what is labelled as the Deloatch Mill Pond was completed, going back to when William
Grant acquired the property in 1808 from his grandfather Joseph Sikes. The first reference to a mill on
the property occurs within the last will and testament of William Grant who passed away in June 1818,
bequeathing his mill and adjoining lands to his sons Newitt (2/3 interest) and William (1/3 interest).
Throughout the 19t1i and early 20'1i centuries, the mill property then passed through various hands,
including Thomas Deloatch, James W. Grant, Alanson Capehart, Wm. Boon, Thomas B. Gatling, Willie
Edwards, Dorsey Deloatch, John T. Deloatch, Jas. I Deloatch, Abner Lassiter, P.T. Hicks, and A.J.
Flythe. Additional background research revealed that the mill, owned by Dorsey Deloatch at the time,
was burned to the ground in 1863 by a Union cavalry regiment under the command of Col. Samuel P.
Spears. Congress later appropriated $308 to pay Deloatch's claim for the amount of property used,
stolen, and destroyed (from the 9 Mar 1899 issue of The Patron and Gleaner [Page 3]).
Aerial imagery, dating back to the 1950s, as well as historic mapping was further inspected for any
additional indication for the mill location. Around 2012/2013, the drainage appears to have been
timbered or at least devoid of foliage. A straight (presumably man-made) channel, measuring about 400
feet long, can be seen on the north side of the roadway heading toward Bridge No. 20. Whether this
channel is associated with the historic mill or simply represents a rechanneling effort of the creek cannot
be determined. Various newspaper listings for Deloatch's Mill, mostly from the 1890s, were reviewed;
however, none was descriptive enough to offer specific locational information although some Inspector
Reports noted the condition of the Public Road near Deloatch's Mill (from the 19 May 1898 issue of The
Patron and Gleaner out of Lasker, NC):
"No. 4, From Jere Brown's to fork near Deloatch's Mill. Daniel E. Knight contractor
$29.00. Examined March 19. Find this road in fair order; it has just been worked and
some places rough; one bridge in bad shape." [Page 1]
"No. 11 From Deloatch's mill to J. B. Grant's fork, Daniel E. Knight contractor $22.00.
Examined March 16. Found this road in good order except one hollow bridge and the hill
at Deloatches mill." [Page 1]
Discussion was also made public regarding the maintenance of the road itself and who's responsibility it
was:
"It was ordered by the board that Rev. Jesse Flythe, S. J. Calvert, Jas. I. Deloatch, and
Abner Lassiter be appointed as a committee to investigate and ascertain whether or not
the dam across the Deloatch's mill run is a public road or not, and in the event it is not, to
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
3 of 7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
suggest what is best done in the premises." (from the 7 Mar 1895 issue of The Patron and
Gleaner [Page 3])
"The Committee appointed at a former meeting to examine into and report at this meeting
whether the dam across Deloatch's mill was a public road or not and whose duty it was to
keep said dam and bridges across same in repair, reported, through Rev. Jesse Flythe,
chairman, in substance that the dam is a public road and had been for about one hundred
years, and that the owners of the mill had always, as per agreement at the time the mill
was constructed, kept in repair that dam and all bridges except the one at the pier head
which should be kept up by the County." (from the 4 Apr 1895 issue of The Patron and
Gleaner [Page 2])
Finally, the 1938 State Highway Map may offer the most information regarding the road and possible
location for the mill. Based on symbology, Creeksville Road was a "graded and drained" (i.e., dirt) road
leading up to either side of the Potecasi Creek drainage. Across the entire width of Potecasi Creek,
Creeksville Road is noted as a "gravel or stone surfaced" road; however, running parallel to and
immediately adjacent to Creeksville Road appears to be another road labelled as a "Paved Road, High
Type." At first, this symbology was believed to be for a dam, but no other mill pond location on the 1938
State Highway Map appears with such a symbol. In addition, the symbol for a "business establishment"
and the number 4 (denoting 4 buildings within a small area) appear on the north side of Creeksville Road
between the east edge of the Potecasi Creek drainage and what is now NCHS East Road (SR 1505).
Presumably, this location may be where the old mill complex once stood (other than the mill dam itself,
which most likely equates with the current embankment for Creeksville Road across Potecasi Creek).
SUMMARY
Unfortunately, aside from the documentary evidence, these investigations resulted in no archaeological
sites being documented within or immediately adjacent to the APE. It is recommended that the proposed
project be allowed to proceed without any concerns for impacts to significant archaeological resources.
Additional fieldwork within the APE is unlikely to provide any significant or substantial amount of
archaeological data. Therefore, it is recommended that additional archaeological work should not be
required. Based on the results of the survey, a finding of "No NRHP-Eligible or -Listed Archaeological
Sites Present" within the APE is considered appropriate for the proposed project. However, should the
description of this project or design plans change prior to construction, then additional consultation
regarding archaeology may be required. If archaeological materials (e.g., remnants of a mill dam) are
uncovered during project activities, then such resources will be dealt with accordingto o the procedures set
forth for "unanticipated discoveries," to include notification of NCDOT's Archaeology Team.
(This project falls within a North Carolina County in which the following federally recognized tribes have
expressed an interest: 1) Catawba Indian Nation and 2) Tuscarora Nation. We recommend that you
ensure that this documentation is forwarded to these tribes using the process described in the current
NCDOT Tribal Protocol and PA Procedures Manual.)
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
4of7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
Signed:
NCDOT
40
Figure 1: Galatia, NC (USGS 1975).
® Photos ❑ Correspondence
June 13, 2022
Area of..Interest
Figure 2: Aerial Imagery (dated 6 Apr 2013), accessed through Google Earth (9 Jun 2022).
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
5of7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
,6CA5
P0
DEL QrI TG H
MIL L POND 3
Mm
TCREEKSVILLE
0
•
Figure 3: Northampton County, North Carolina (State Highway and Public Works Commission
1938, htt2s://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmUs/id/1709/rec/9, last accessed 9 Jun
2022).
Photo 1: Project Corridor, looking Northeast toward Bridge No. 20 (APE = edge of treeline to
edge of treeline).
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
6of7

Project Tracking No.:
22-01-0015
Photo 2: Project Corridor, looking Northeast away from Bridge No. 20 (APE = edge of treeline
to edge of treeline).
Photo 3: Project Corridor, looking Southwest toward Bridge No. 20 (APE = edge of treeline to
edge of treeline).
2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" FORM
7of7