The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20211528 Ver 1_No Archaeoloigcal Survey Required PA 18-12-0029_20211122 Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 1 of 6 18-12-0029 NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: Bridge 166 County: Madison WBS No: 17BP.13.R.161 Document: Minimum Criteria F.A. No: na Funding: State Federal Federal Permit Required? Yes No Permit Type: USACE Project Description: The project calls for the replacement of Bridge No. 166 on SR 1533 (Hamburg Road) over Terry Fork in Madison County. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project is defined as an approximately 930-foot (283.46 m) long corridor running 490 feet (149.35 m) east and 440 feet (134.11 m) west from the center of the bridge. The corridor is roughly 300 feet (91.44 m) wide extending 150 feet (45.72 m) from either side of the centerline. SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions: The proposed Bridge 166 replacement project is located east of Mars Hill in Madison County, North Carolina. The project area is plotted near the center of the Barnardsville USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle (Figure 1). A site file search was conducted by Casey Kirby at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on January 2, 2019. No previously recorded archaeological sites were identified within the APE and only two sites (31MD363 and 31MD365) are found within a mile of bridge. According to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) online data base (HPOWEB 2019), there are no known historic architectural resources within the APE that may yield intact archaeological deposits. Topographic maps, USDA soil survey maps, aerial photographs (NC One Map), historic maps (North Carolina maps website), and Google Street View application were further examined for information on environmental and cultural variables that may have contributed to prehistoric or historic settlement within the project limits and to assess the level of ground disturbance. Bridge 166 and Hamburg Road run east to west along the Terry Fork drainageway (Figure 2). The project area is situated mostly along hillside slopes with a narrow floodplain adjacent to the creek. The floodplain widens towards the southeast. Terry Fork drains west into Paint Fork and is part of the French Broad drainage basin. The area is rural with residential homes, forest, and agricultural properties within the project limits. The house sites have been cut into hillsides and are located north of the road. A pasture is in the floodplain to the southeast. It is low lying and appear saturated with water from images provided by Google Street View. The hillsides seem undisturbed and covered in forest. However, they are steeply sloped and possible eroded. The USDA soil survey map for the county identifies four soil types within the project area (USDA NRCS 2019) (see Figure 2). The French loam (FrA) occupies the floodplain. This is a somewhat poorly drained Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 2 of 6 18-12-0029 soil type with a slope of less than 3 percent. It is subject to occasionally flooding. Due to persistent wetness, this series is unlikely to yield significant evidence of early settlement activities. The hillsides are made up of the Buladean-Chestnut complex (BnE; BnF), the Evard-Cowee complex (EvD2), and Tate loam (TaC). These are all well drained soils with slope generally over 15 percent except on the Tate series. The Evard-Cowee complex is also described as moderately eroded. Slope of 15 percent or more is not usually tested, since intact archaeological resources are unexpected. The Tate series, however, covers a small area to the northwest adjacent to the floodplain at the foot of the hillside. Although moderately sloped at 8 to 15 percent, erosion appear to be the strong in this location according to aerial and Street View images. It also encompasses only a small portion of the APE. Due to disturbance and its limited extent, no significant cultural material is likely present in this area. The absence of known archaeological sites in this region is due to a lack of archaeological investigations. The two known sites (31MD363 and 31MD365) were recorded by amateur archaeologist, who was surface collected along Paint Fork. Although more work is needed in the regions to better understand settlement distribution, the current project setting will no provide any useful information. A map review also failed to provide any significant historical information. Most early maps prior to the 20th century show few details concerning the project area. The 1902 USGS Mount Mitchell topographic map is one of the first to display a reliable location for the project (Figure 3). This map depicts a road similar to Hamburg Road with a crossing at or near the current bridge site. Two structures are also shown, one to the north and the other to the southwest. Both appear to be outside of the project limits. The later 1936 Soil Map for Madison County provides a clearer picture (Hearn et al. 1936) (Figure 4). It illustrates the same road layout with all historic structures well away from the crossing. Although historic resources might be encountered, they should be 20th century in nature and will not provide any new or important information. Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE: The proposed Bridge 166 replacement project in Madison County is not likely to impact any significant archaeological resources. This is due steep hillside slopes and persistently wet soils, which contribute to a low probability for archaeological sites. No further archaeological work is recommended for this project. But if design plans change to affect subsurface areas beyond the defined APE, further archaeological consultation might be necessary. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: Map(s) Previous Survey Info Photos Correspondence Photocopy of County Survey Notes Other: FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST NO ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED 1/3/19 C. Damon Jones Date NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 3 of 6 18-12-0029 REFERENCES CITED Hearn, Edward, Eugene Goldston, William Davis, C. Croom, and Samuel Davidson 1936 Soil Map for Madison County, North Carolina. U.S. Department of Argiculture, Government Printing Office, Washington D.C. On file at North Carolina Collections, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. HPOWEB 2018 North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office GIS Web Service. http://gisNCDCR.gov/hpoweb/. Accessed January 2, 2019. United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Services (USDA NRCS) 2018 Madison County Soil Survey. Available online at http://webosilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed January 2, 2019. United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1902 Mount Mitchell, North Carolina-Tennessee 30 minute quadrangle map. Reprinted in 1932. 2013 Barnardsville, North Carolina 7.5 minute quadrangle map. Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 4 of 6 18-12-0029 Figure 1. Topographic Setting of the Project Area, Barnardsville (2013), NC USGS 7′5 Topographic Quadrangle. Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 5 of 6 18-12-0029 Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the APE showing development, contours, and soils. Project Tracking No.: “No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for the Amended Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 6 of 6 18-12-0029 Figure 3. The 1902 USGS Mount Mitchell topographic map showing the location of the project area. Figure 4. The 1936 Soil Map for Madison County showing the location of the project area.