20201505 Ver 1_B-5728 PA 16-01-0055 Alamance No Archaeological Survey Required Form_20220106

Project Tracking No.:
“No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007/2015 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 3
16-01-0055

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: B-5728 County: Alamance
WBS No: 45684.1.1 Document: CE
F.A. No: N/A Funding: State Federal
Federal Permit Required? Yes No Permit Type: NWP

Project Description: The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 112 on NC 87 over Reedy Fork Creek
in Alamance County. Bridge No. 112 was built in 1949, and is considered to be structurally deficient and
functionally obsolete. The Proposed Study Area for the project will be centered on the bridge and
measure about 300 feet wide by about 2,100 feet long. Overall, the Study Area will encompass about
605,920 square feet (13.9 acres), inclusive of the existing roadway and structure to be replaced.

SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW

Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:

A map review and site file search was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on Friday,
January 15, 2016. An archaeological study has been conducted along this particular stretch of NC 87 (see
Glover 1994 [TIP# R-2560]), and three (3) archaeological sites have been recorded within one-half (1/2)
mile of the proposed project. Digital copies of HPO’s maps (Ossipee Quadrangle) as well as the
HPOWEB GIS Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) were last reviewed on Monday, January 25, 2016.
There are three (3) known historic architectural resources (Ossipee Mill [AM0321], Ossipee Mill Houses
[AM0322], and Troxler House [AM0510]) within the vicinity of the Study Area; however, intact
archaeological deposits associated with these resources would not 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 level of
modern, slope, agricultural, hydrological, and other erosive-type disturbances within and surrounding the
archaeological APE.

Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting
that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE:

This is a State-funded project for which a Federal permit will be required. The need for temporary and/or
permanent easements has not been determined; however, the overall dimensions of the Study Area will
capture any necessary easements. At this time, we are in compliance with NC GS 121-12a, since there
are no eligible (i.e. National Register-listed) archaeological resources located within the project’s Study
Area that would require our attention. From an environmental perspective, Alamance County lies within
the upland portion of the Piedmont Plateau region. The Study Area is characterized by gently rolling
topography, which gives way to more rugged terrain near Reedy Fork Creek. The Study Area consists of
six (6) soil types: Lloyd loam, 10-15% slopes, eroded (LbD2), Buncombe loamy fine sand, 0-2% slopes,
occasionally flooded (Ba), Wilkes soils, 10-15% slopes (WbD), Helena coarse sandy loam, 2-6% slopes,
Project Tracking No.:
“No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007/2015 Programmatic Agreement.
2 of 3
16-01-0055
eroded (HbB2), Enon fine sandy loam, 6-10% slopes, eroded (EdC2), and Wilkes soils, 6-10% slopes
(WbC). The eroded, occasionally flooded, and moderately sloped soil conditions within the Study Area
are not favorable for containing intact archaeological sites/resources. Preservation of archaeological
materials within such soil types is likely to be poor. In addition, the Study Area falls within the project
limits that were surveyed in 1994 as a result of the proposed NC 87 road widening project (TIP# R-2560).
Based on the field methodology for that survey, the B-5728 Study Area was not deemed appropriate for
formal archaeological investigations. In 1949, NC 87 was rerouted to bypass the towns of Ossipee and
Altamahaw in northwestern Alamance County. As noted above, Bridge No. 112 was built in 1949, thus
as part of the bypass project. Much of the corridor would have been greatly disturbed by the construction
of the new alignment for NC 87 at that time. For comparative purposes, the Office of State Archaeology
(OSA) has reviewed several projects within the vicinity of Bridge No. 112 for environmental compliance,
including two (2) borrow pits (ER 86-7162 and ER 86-7504) and a stream restoration site (ER 06-1831).
Stating a low probability and “NR eligible sites unlikely,” OSA did not recommend archaeological
surveys to be conducted. Although three (3) archaeological sites are located nearby, one at the confluence
of Reedy Fork Creek and the Haw River and two further upstream along the Haw River, none of the sites
were deemed eligible for the National Register. The contextual integrity of these sites has been greatly
compromised by erosion and flooding episodes, limiting their archaeological interpretive significance.
Based on the nature of the proposed project, current soil conditions, and previous review/survey work, it
is believed that the current Study Area, as depicted, is unlikely to contain intact and significant
archaeological resources. No archaeological survey is required for this project. If design plans change or
are made available prior to construction, then additional consultation regarding archaeology will be
required. At this time, no further archaeological work is recommended. If archaeological materials are
uncovered during project activities, then such resources will be dealt with according to the procedures set
forth for “unanticipated discoveries,” to include notification of NCDOT’s Archaeology Group.

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

January 25, 2016
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST Date
Project Tracking No.:
“No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007/2015 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 3
16-01-0055
Figure 1: Ossipee, NC (USGS 1970).
Bridge No. 112 on NC 87
over Reedy Fork Creek
GF
NC 87OSSIPEE FRONTBRIDGEVIEWGERRINGER
TROXLER
Ba
W
LbD2
Ba
WbD
LbB2
WbC
HbB2
WbD
Wd
WcE
EdC2
W
CaC3
W
LaE3
CaC3
Wd
EdC2
EeC2
CaC3
EeD2
LbB2
Reedy Fork (Hardys Mill Pond)
Reedy Fork (Hardys Mill Pond)
Ossippee Mill
Ossippee Mill Houses
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid,IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
B-5728 (PA 16-01-0055)Replace Bridge No. 112 onNC 87 over Reedy Fork Creek in Ossipee, Alamance County, NC
Area of Potential Effects (APE)
GF Cemetery
NCHPOpoints
Contour_002
HYARUT
Named_streams
NCHPO_NR_SL_DOE_Boundaries
mapfldhazar
Soils_All
Alamance_2014Parcels
Streets ¹
0 100 200 300 40050
Feet