20230684 Ver 1_More Info Received_20230831

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
521 East Morehead Street, Suite 425
Stantec Charlotte NC 28202-2695
August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Regulatory Program Manager
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Ste 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center;
Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00665; DWR# 20230684; Catawba County
Dear Ms. Stygar,
On behalf of the applicant, Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft), Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) is
pleased to submit this response to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) request for additional
information dated August 1, 2023.
Prior to answering your questions, please let us revise the impact assessment. As design has progressed
on the buildings and utility layouts, the final grading plans have required changes at four (4) impact
locations, described below. The overall permanent stream impacts onsite have decreased from 686 linear
feet (LF) to 681 LF, an overall decrease of 5 LF. Temporary stream impacts have decreased from 258 LF to
256 LF. The Preferred Alternative will now result in permanent impacts to 681 LF (0.07 AC) stream channel
and temporary impacts to 256 LF (0.02 AC) of stream channel. An updated set of Jurisdictional Impact
Maps is provided in Attachment 1.
DESIGN CHANGES
Impact SC1
As shown on Figure 1 below, with final grading and utility layouts, the access road between the substation
and Buildings 13 and 14 must be widened, resulting in an increase in permanent impacts at Impact SC1
from 5 LF to 25 LF.
This increase is necessary because the width of the perimeter road has been increased due to:
• The requirement to place 8 electrical conduits, a waterline, sanitary sewer and fiber conduits
within and along the roadbed.
• Each utility has a required depth and separation from other utilities as required by the federal,
state and local regulations that apply, and the utility services' requirements.
• The locations of the substation pond and the Building CLT14 pond limit changes to the
alignment of the perimeter access road and utilities.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 2 of 3
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
_ r
� f
4.
TEMPORARY IMPACT 5C2 -�
78 LFt 48-004 ACtj
PERMANENT IMPACT SC
25 LFt {0-001 ACtj
Figure 1. Updated Impact SC1
Impact SC3
Temporary impacts associated with the construction of the culvert and wingwalls at the crossing between
the north and south sections of the site will occur. The temporary impact has decreased from 27 LF of
perennial stream to 25 LF and will allow access for installation of the culvert, utilities, and wingwalls.
Updated Impact SC4 is shown in Figure 2 below. The plan and profile for Impact SC3 are provided in
Attachment 1 on Figures 4 & 4-1.
Impact SC4
In an effort to further minimize stream impacts, the length of the proposed culvert pipes at Impact SC4 was
minimized by pulling back the headwalls at the inlet and outlet. During review, it was noted that the slope
around the outfall retaining walls was too steep, and the grading was revised. Due to this change, the
permanent impact proposed with the installation of the culvert pipes has decreased from 358 LF to 341 LF.
Updated Impact SC4 is shown in Figure 2 below. The plan, profile and cross -sections for Impact SC4 are
provided in Attachment 1 on Figures 4, 4-1 and 4-2.
Impact SC5
In an effort to further minimize stream impacts, the length of the proposed riprap outfall protection at the
crossing between the north and south sections of the site has been decreased from 49 LF to 41 LF.
Updated Impact SC5 is shown in Figure 2 below. The plan and profile for Impact SC5 are provided in
Attachment 1 on Figures 4, 4-1 and 4-2.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 3 of 4
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
.
UNDERGROUND
ELECTRICAL UCT BANK
WATERLINE
111..
j`{ -� i•F1 -� K
4{1jIILL
Qw-
1
II IlI��III
.....;�;�
�14 i4;
T EMPORARY IMPACT SW
•i��`'l�T
�.�
1 (0.007
/+J( J11 rr jjfj
�II�
11•i/
+rrrr1 11/r Pjig.?i�''`
�!! �I rli r ��f 1�
ANENT IMPACT S
-
.11lill�i�1111���t������ttttt��t���-
--
Figure 2. Updated Impacts SC3 through SC5
An updated impacts table is provided in Table 1 below with the modified impacts bolded.
Table 1. Updated Impacts Table
Impact
Type of Impact
Permanent Stream Impacts
Temporary Stream Impacts
AC
LF
AC
LF
SA1
Fill for access road
0.001
16
-
-
SA2
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.001
11
SA3
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.003
44
SA4
Road Crossing - Culvert
0.013
225
-
-
SA5
Riprap Outfall
0.002
33
-
-
SA6
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.001
48
SC1
Fill for access road/utlities
0.001
25
-
-
SC2
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.004
78
SC3
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.004
25
SC4
Road Crossing - Culvert
0.045
341
-
-
SC5
Riprap Outfall
0.007
41
-
-
SC6
Temporary construction access
-
-
0.007
50
TOTAL
0.07 AC
681 LF
0.02 AC
256 LF
Update to Mitigation
The required compensatory mitigation has decreased slightly, and 1,214 credits are now proposed to be
provided through a credit purchase from the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) In -Lieu Fee
Program.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 4 of 5
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
Table 2. Stream Compensatory Mitigation
Impact
Length of
Impact (L)
Mitigation
Ratio (MR)
Compensation
Requirement
(CR)
LF
(L x MR)
SA1
16
2:1
32
SA4
225
2:1
450
SA5
33
N/A (PNNL)'
0
SC1
25
2:1
50
SC4
341
2:1
682
SC5
41
N/A (PNNL)'
0
TOTAL
681
Total CR
1,214
Permanent No Net Loss Impacts (Riprap)
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Your questions are presented first, followed by our answers in italics.
A. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the proposed work is
the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please furnish information regarding any
other alternatives, including upland alternatives, to the work for which you have applied and provide
justification that your selected plan is the least damaging to water or wetland areas.
a. Specifically, please add to the alternatives analysis provided in your Individual Permit application
dated May 26, 2023:
a. What is the minimum MW required to achieve the purpose and need of the proposed project?
Response: A minimum of 240 MW was determined to be the MW necessary to make the
project viable in the Charlotte region.
b. Please explain how five (5) buildings at 48 MW each would provide 488 MW of total storage.
Response: The reference to 488 megawatts (MW) of storage provided in the overview in
Section 1.1 of the narrative was incorrect. The correct amount of storage provided by the five-
48 MW buildings is 240 MW as described in Section 6.3.2.3 on Page 37 of the narrative.
c. The applicant has indicated under the purpose and need section 4.2 that, "The State of North
Carolina encourages data centers to locate within the state and currently provides three sales
and use tax exemptions for purchase of items related to data centers and their operations." The
Corps is seeking a demonstration that the site selection criteria was not solely monetarily
based. Further in the narrative, the applicant indicates, that "Because Catawba County is
already home to several data centers, the county has existing fiber and electrical infrastructure
to serve additional sites as well as low taxes, making it a desirable location for data centers."
Furthermore, "Microsoft has guaranteed a $1 Billion minimum investment in Catawba County
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 5 of 6
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
associated with four data center sites." Please provide further detailed analysis that the
proposed data centers could not be viable outside of Catawba County, North Carolina.
Response: The site selection criteria were not solely monetarily based. Except for the cost of a
particular piece of land, monetary issues are secondary or tertiary to the siting criteria. New
regions are not selected based on state or local incentives, but on regional data demand, -
therefore, incentives tend to be incidental to the creation of a region.
An off -site analysis describing siting criteria in more detail and the search for land that would
allow the development of a regional network in North Carolina is provided in Attachment 2. A
summary is below:
Once a region is identified, initial analysis for available parcels requires the identification of:
1. Areas with access to long -haul fiber.
2. Areas with access to sanitary sewer and water lines.
3. Areas with access to electrical transmission lines and/or be identified future power service
expansion.
4. Parcels that ideally intersect all three of the above lines or are less than 0.25 miles away
from them and do not cross multiple other parcels (requires easements).
5. Available land that meets or exceeds a certain acreage. Based on recent projects,
approximately 100 acres is required to allow for the construction of 5-48 MW data centers
with a substation and stormwater management ponds while avoiding jurisdictional features.
6. Potentially hazardous sites or environmental justice sites within the vicinity.
7. Potential environmental issues (wetlands/waters of the US, other environmental issues,
artifacts, and endangered species).
The site selection criteria noting the preference for statutory incentives for taxes and or local
rebates/incentives is included as a criterion after the initial search is completed. If there are
enough parcels available in multiple jurisdictions, these criteria have a role to play in
determining the preferred location.
d. Please provide a revised table that compares the selection criteria outlines below to your offsite
alternatives, refer to Table 10 in your application submittal. Please use the following selection
criteria and quantify as appropriate: Minimum MW required to achieve the purpose and need of
the project; Proximity to other data centers (in miles); Utilities (Sewer, water, electric, existing
infrastructure); number of buildings, minimum parcel acreage required; zoning (industrial);
proximity to large scale infrastructure/development; proximity to floodplain (miles); aquatic
resources on alternative parcels (wetlands and waters); amount of impact of waters/wetlands
on those parcels.
Response: A revised version of Table 10 is provided in Attachment 3.
e. The applicant indicated that site selection and suitability, "9. Land that is: a Least impactful to
the environment (wetlands/waters of the US, other environmental issues, artifacts, and
endangered species) b. not close to airports, freeways, schools, churches, and shopping
centers." Please clarify why the applicant is unable to potentially work with land that is close to
the above listed restraints.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 6 of 7
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
Response: Generally speaking, developers utilize site selection checklists to determine the
optimal site for a project. With regards to datacenters, the site selection process is very
detailed.
Physical risk assessments are conducted at different points during the land acquisition process.
Areas prone to hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes are generally avoided. Proximity to
transportation routes for hazardous materials or chemicals such as freeways, gas pipelines,
railway lines and airport take -off and landing zones can pose a physical risk to datacenter
infrastructure.
Proximity to community gathering points such as schools, churches and shopping centers is
avoided for environmental justice and security reasons. Dense residential neighborhoods are
also avoided where possible.
f. Please revise any design drawings that could potentially be affected by the above referenced
request for information.
Response: No design changes are proposed beyond those detailed in the first section of this
response.
g. Please provide further clarification as to why Catawba County was selected for the project
location. Further, please provide additional justification as to why the following site selection
criteria were chosen:
Statutory incentives for taxes and or local rebates/incentives: Example - property tax
abatements, income tax free zones, enterprise zones.
Response: Please refer to the answer provided under A. (c) above and the off -site analysis
provided in Attachment 2 for additional information on the use of incentives as a criterion.
h. Section 6.2.2.1 Offsite Alternatives: The applicant determined that Catawba County, was the
most appropriate project location based on the site selection, and other suitability criteria. The
applicant did not state which other areas, counties, and/or cities were considered for the
proposed development in the North Carolina Regional Network Gateway. Therefore, please
provide other locations that were considered along with reasons/justifications as to why those
sites were not chosen.
Response: Please refer to the off -site analysis provided in Attachment 2.
i. In the alternatives analysis has indicated that every alternative is five (5) single story buildings,
(Example: Summary Site 1 would not meet the project purpose because of insufficient
developable areas for the required data storage capacity and would have greater impacts to the
aquatic environment.") Please provide reasoning/justifications as to why two-story buildings are
not feasible or considered under the alternative analysis.
Response: Two-story options were considered but were deemed impractical due to the
following additional reasons:
• The potential permanent impacts to streams that could be minimized were minimal as they
would be limited to SA (16 LF) and SC (5 LF). All other permanent stream impacts (665
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 7 of 8
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
LF) are associated with the two road crossings which are required for access into and
across the site.
• Multiple story buildings may decrease the building footprint but there would be an increase
in the overall footprint of the generator and transformer equipment yard adjacent to each
building and require additional equipment to be placed outside, such as chillers. In addition,
parking areas will remain the same size.
• Multiple story buildings do not decrease the required utilities (electrical and fiber conduits,
water and sewer lines, and stormwater pipes) which all have required separation distances.
• Construction of each data center building, whether single -story or multi -story, requires
adequate acreage for construction laydown areas. These areas must be located directly
adjacent to the data center buildings and associated equipment construction area. The
laydown area supports the construction/building area and includes:
o Site office and trade parking—250-300 spaces
o Construction equipment such as the telescopic booms, man lifts, and scissor lifts
necessary for steel beam installation.
0 Construction power generation.
0 Area to organize and stack structural steel and staging for building construction. Steel
beams must be located within easy reach to allow erection of building structures.
0 Stormwater, water and sewer pipe staging.
A photo of an existing laydown area from another region is provided below. Please note
that the set-up of the laydown area is completed by a general contractor and the needs for
each site are project specific.
Figure 3. Example of a laydown area
j. Alternative Site 3 (McCreary Farms): The applicant indicated that, "The parcel is currently
zoned industrial and surrounded by residential land. The parcels bordering the west and east
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 8 of 9
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
sides of the site were initially analyzed for additional acreage, but they are zoned residential,
which would require re -zoning and they were not available for purchase." Please provide
additional details as to why an alternative that could not be reasonably feasible or purchased
was considered a viable alternative option to the applicants preferred alternative?
Response: To reiterate what was discussed in the answer provided under A. (c) above, the
initial analysis for available parcels includes a search for available land that meets or exceeds a
certain acreage. Based on recent projects, approximately 100 acres is required to allow for the
construction of 5-48 MW data centers with a substation and stormwater management ponds
while avoiding jurisdictional features to the greatest extent feasible. At 106.1 AC, the parcel for
Site 3 met the acreage required to be considered viable for the proposed project. While at least
5-48 MW buildings are necessary to meet the regional need, that number is considered a
minimum. If there are multiple unbuilt parcels adjoining each other, neighboring parcels may be
analyzed to see if they could be acquired if the project were to move forward on the site.
k. "The area at the rear of the property along Pinch Gut Creek contains steep slopes and grading
would have impacts to at least 1.5 AC of a FEMA regulated 100-year floodplain and the
associated floodway. Engineering requirements would be extensive; mitigation for the impacts
would not be possible onsite; and permitting requirements, if possible, would extend the
timeline for construction." Please provide additional details as to why mitigation for the impacts
is not possible onsite and were considered as part of the alternatives analysis, when the
proposed LEDPA for the preferred action alternative does not have onsite mitigation proposed?
Please provide additional details as to why the extension of the timeline of construction are
considered under the selection criteria.
Response: The mitigation referenced in the description of Offsite Alternative 3 would be for fill
within the FEMA regulated floodplain as opposed to mitigation for wetland and/or stream
impacts. None of the sites propose onsite mitigation for floodplain impacts.
With regards to the timeline for construction, data centers are planned well ahead of time to
meet growing need (usually about 2 years). Some redundancy is built into the timeline but any
unexpected increases of 6 to 12 months or more would affect when additional data storage
would be available, thereby affecting regional service capabilities.
I. Offsite alternative 3 states, "No existing fiber in proximity. This would require an extension from
existing lines." Please provide additional details for all alternatives in regard to this statement.
What is the distance/location to the utility substation, building hook -in that indicates that this
was a key component to determining offsite alternatives. In addition, please provide this
information for the LEDPA. Furthermore, in Table 10, please define "adjacent' in regard to
"other utilities."
Response: In the context of utilities necessary for the project, the term "adjacent" references
utilities located along the project boundary, preferably along roads. The extension of offsite
utilities requires approval of the provider and easements across multiple properties which may
not be acceptable to the property owners. For Offsite Alternative 3, the closest fiber connection
point is located approximately 0.43 miles away, on the other side of Route 321 (Business).
m. On -site alternative 1 demonstrates 6-48 MW (288 MW) and a 10.73AC substation pad site.
Please provide additional details showing why a six -building design was considered for an
onsite alternative when the preferred alternative only has five buildings planned?
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 9 of 10
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action ID# SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
Response: While five-48 MW buildings are necessary to meet the regional need, that number
is considered a minimum. During the site due diligence phase, the initial site plan attempts to
maximize the building footprint and the potential MWs onsite. In this case, the possibility of
fitting 6 buildings onsite was explored but ultimately discarded.
In the applicants discussion of onsite alternatives, "Alternative Layout 1 was not chosen due to
the excessive impacts to streams with the entrance road and the easternmost building on the
northern pad site. Alternative layout 2 included the minimization of the stream impacts
associated with the entrance road, but the impacts were still too high and the added
requirements to increase the substation pad site required redesign; therefore, this alternative
was not chosen. Alternative 3 was not chosen due to the excessive impacts to streams that
added over 250 LF of stream impacts to the floodplain crossing. The total amount of data
storage also decreased from 288 MW in alternative layout 1, to 268.8 MW in alternative layout
2 then 244 MW in alternative layout 3 and finally 240 MW in the preferred alternative." Please
provide additional details and consistent data when comparing onsite alternatives.
Response: The onsite alternatives discussion is presented in table format below (Table 3). The
determination column describes why that layout was discarded.
Table 3. Onsite Alternatives Comparison
Layout
Estimated Stream
MW
Building
Determination
Impacts (LF)
sizes^
1
1, 226 LF
288
6 x 48 MW
Stream impacts excessive. Needed to
decrease footprint.
4 x 48 MW;
Footprint/impacts decreased but
2
836 LF
268.8
2 x 38.4 MW
redesign was required due to change in
substation footprint and location.
Redesign decreased number of
3
1,201 LF
240
5 x 48 MW
buildings and added >250 LF to
floodplain crossing. Needed to decrease
impacts.
Preferred
Access roads to ponds redesigned.
Alternative
686* (796#)
240
5 x 48 MW
Impacts decreased. Moved forward with
this design.
'Based on approved wetlands delineation mapping; # Based on the anticipated streams; ^Each building is made of a number of
colocation units, each providing 9.6 MW
B. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practicable steps to minimize losses of Waters
of the U.S. including wetlands. Please indicate all that you have done, especially regarding
development and modification of plans and proposed construction techniques, to minimize adverse
impacts.
I have evaluated the avoidance and minimization included in your application and have determined the
details to be generally sufficient for our evaluation.
Response: Acknowledged.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 10 of 11
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
C. The MOA requires that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for all unavoidable
adverse impacts remaining after the applicant has employed all appropriate and practicable
minimization. Please indicate your plan to mitigate for the projected, unavoidable loss of waters or
wetlands or provide information as to the absence of any such appropriate and practicable measures.
The applicant has chosen to purchase 1,372 stream mitigation units (SMUs) from the North Carolina
Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) to offset the unavoidable loss of 686 LF of stream channel.
Response: Acknowledged. Please see update to required mitigation provided under design changes
above.
Additionally, the following items must be resolved prior to continuing to process your permit request.
The applicant has provided Threatened and Endangered Species information including proposed listed
species. "The tri-colored bat has been proposed to be federally listed as endangered and is expected to
be officially listed before this site goes to construction. Roosting habitat is present across the site in the
form of forested areas. Acoustic surveys are scheduled to occur at the end of May 2023 for this species
and further analysis and results will be provided at that time." Please provide the results of the acoustic
surveys, and any avoidance and minimization measures based on the survey results that the applicant
proposes.
Response: A study plan was submitted to the USFWS Asheville Office for review and received a
response stating that "Site 10 is within a 1.5-mile roost buffer. We assume bats are present in this
buffer and do not recommend surveys in this area. Negative survey results would not negate the
assumption of presence." Therefore, no survey was completed. The Applicant will abide by a time of
year restriction on tree clearing between May 15 — August 15.
2. The applicant has indicated that "No previously recorded archaeological sites are located within the
Project Area. Four previously recorded archaeological sites are located within a 1.6-kilometer(1-mile)
radius of the Project Area." Based on the Corps review area, there are numerous sites within the overall
project area that were assigned archaeological numbers with the Office of State Archaeology in
January of 2023. The Corps requests a copy of the survey results, and files that were complied. The
Corps requests to be copied on any correspondence with the State Historic Preservation Office.
NCSHPO indicated that this information request is required. Please provide the Corps with a copy of
the historical report (HSSR) and any correspondence between the applicant and NCSHPO. Your
response to this item needs to include 1) date(s) of field survey; and 2) approximate timeframe when
the survey and report will be available to the Corps and NCSHPO.
Response: From November 28 to December 7, of 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec)
conducted a field survey of approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) associated with the proposed
Boyd Farm Data Center. Two reports were completed: A Phase I Architectural Survey dated March 14,
2023, and a Phase 1 Archaeological Survey dated March 17, 2023. Copies of the surveys are provided
in Attachment 4.
3. In the discussion of impacts, the applicant indicates that on several impacts, Example. Impact SA4-
Road Crossing -Culvert. "The culvert will be countersunk 12- inches and back -filled with onsite
materials." Please provide a description as to what onsite materials definition is. The Corps is
concerned that the use of non -clean fill may be utilized and want to ensure clean fill materials will be
use.
Design with community in mind

August 31, 2023
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Page 11 of 11
Reference: Request for Additional Information: Boyd Farm Data Center; DWR# 20230684; Corps Action IN SAW-2023-00665;
Catawba County
Response: The existing stream bed materials will be excavated first and stored separately from other
onsite spoil piles and will be utilized to recreate the channel within the culvert pipe. Backfill around the
culvert pipe will consist of existing onsite soils which is free from contaminants.
4. Please provide your responses to the public comments received.
Response: A matrix with responses to the public comments is provided in Attachment 5.
5. Please note that responses to the questions above may prompt additional information requests to allow
full evaluation of the proposed project.
Response: Acknowledged.
Thank you for your assistance with the permit applications, If I can be of further assistance, please contact
me at [phone] or amber.forestier(@stantec.com if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.
Amber Forestier
Senior Regulatory Specialist
Phone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attachments: Attachment 1: Updated Jurisdictional Impact Maps;
Attachment 2: Off -Site Analysis: North Carolina;
Attachment 3: Table 10 Revised;
Attachment 4: Cultural Resource Surveys; and
Attachment 5: Public Notice Comment Responses
Cc: Lexi Jones & Claire Wolanski (Microsoft), Loretta Cummings (Stantec)
Design with community in mind

(3 Stantec
Attachment 1:
Updated Jurisdictional Impact Maps

J
N o
0 ¢ ID w ..
O /_ \ O ZN > m
O owU x
Z
LL
a
N U�w �o
}Q / ❑❑ o
_� 1 p2 Q
s
_ \ N
U i Z C z
�0 �Q
1 -O�
L� v� -d p
co uj
�euN
LU
W 0
Q
0/—�� \
w \
=I 9+p %L ' IbVON(108 S \
U UU+U, NdWyC
CLT 12 ro z �o o J
/ W O�
Q (0U)
CLT11 //W a vjRo
CLT10 N Z Oz
Q 11z
Z
' Q
U Q O
w � LL } U w
\ W O °� U¢
z w ❑
A g ❑ z
O
it
\ t' 4p ii � w 2 X X
\ \ a I�lfj u= �r.t r \ z a it (If
OO
..; / _ LU OU OF F Q
❑ c O
\� LL II
MOOEN
�
1
W Y
Q W w � ZQ (if
m
m
w U) U1 l l
U) LL
W LU W J
J
ll
J
N
Q Q Q N
Q
Q
o
0
0,
V
N
Qw
w
Q
it
Z
w
Q Of
Z
JOLL'
Q
F- w�
zM
2
U wwOF
F
wa
w
l% U
❑
fn
U)
Q ❑
w
H
D
�
Q Q
ooa
a
a
H
J
V
w
p
N
n,
0
o
a �
o
Q
M
0
a
O
N
W
U
0
0
O
0
0
0C�
cn
0
0
O
0
0
O
U
a
J
N
N
M
W
Q
o
�
o
w Q
(2
N
1f1
I�
O
p,
Q
O
O
0
O
0
O
O
O
0
O
0
O
4t
¢
w
v
Q
¢
N
Q
M
a
a
Q
a
cD
Q
U
N
U
c�
U
a
U
U
co
U
-
w
a
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CO
O
U
w a w
j
j
W W F W� w
w
Z
d
z
❑ ❑
Z Z❑
F a U U O
W'o W 0, ZO
J
w
0
> > J w
2 U
O O 0
O w
J
w W m W
F U U U
U
2
❑
d �_
it
O
w Z Z) Z J >a>
wQ
J w� a— O
J a.(
n
Q' n❑ n W >
W
J
J I
,

s �(
/.
o
Ld / / ✓ 04
uwi
o o
o I
1 Qm
` / ( LL.I Z N CC 5
_ _ c
Q t0Z 0
(,� U�Z ¢ yv
J-
( w o
o
IF CL
1CLN
O OU� \ I ( d p 2
'a
UO < a
L) O I I ¢ w
C ~
Q 0 ( Z
O I y Q
`I J Z
I I O °
y C
wZ
IL 2 S`IVI 2
r +IILL
O� \ I I
0 I Q>
N<
a �
W U¢w
wN
` 1
C of \ we \ 0
� � \ � � � � Z � � � � V o 0
w I \
-� y � a��
��� I
v 0 m�
oo� <� 0
wLu
�� I I
I rM oaLL I )
�Osz I
wo¢
O- g 0 U
o g-j
COCOW! \
M❑� I I-
\� w
I I Cw Z m
sLU
I�
Of
m> a
I0 0
Q
z
Z
it z
Q
Q� 0� O
gWco
W a
W
a
w
a
W
00 F
LL 0
n+i
Lu
a� wU)
F
w
z
a
Z
o o�
U0
Q
0
au
u)
a
> >O
O Y O J W
�¢
O o
X
UO O 0
O
(�7m �� ?
�C5
!{(LL
❑
a
Of a a X
d'
O
- Z D Z W >Q
Z J
ZM
wQJ
d� d� 0
J
d
0
2' 00 � W >
W
J
W
I
d
TD

U)
z
0
U
w
CO
❑ LO U)
Q O
m F.
0wU U x
pz ❑
U<Z Q o v
pW o
p J
p 02 O 8
N
a
c
F N
Q m i
a o
U
a O
N
`�
U)
O
In
O In
O
O
Lf)
Dm
O
a
w¢ W
00
00
co
co m
m
m m
aDo
it
Z c o
° z
o
w
y a
+
W
c
00
>
U m ui
O
Y w m
z
O
98'bZ8
NO
0
=
s o
N
U
w
®U
o a
w
N
N
�
D
Q
in
co
O
m
O u
w coW
O
O
J
m 00
C)
U
Q
U
—
.�
c
0
Eo
u
U o 0
O
0
z
F
U
X
w
z
uO
00
o
00
z
uO
.0
o uO
m m
o
co
00 00
w
m
00
o
00
+
w
m
U
m
M
U
U-
_
U
a
9L'E l8
TO
O
7
a
9L'E l8
Ce)
J
❑
w
w
LL
—
I
I
J
U
o
LL
w
(L-V)L£'ll9:NIANI
<
9E'ZLS
o
O
COZV#MH
1
Q
9E'Z l8
+
cow
w
0
a
—
a
I
o
`-`
o
�
I
`
+ =n
a
w
w
99' l l8
CAa
o
I
�i
a I
II
L)
¢
O+
w
o
0
O
0l'Ol8
a>
00 w
Z
I
m
0
N�
o
W
W
LL
J
I
w 0
(oa
o
F F
—
p F Y
a. 0¢
LL
N
CAI
I
a
6b'608
LO a
O
�
¢_
Q w
z
L U)
v)
I
U)
w
wmo
co
a
a
v0i
>_
J z
0
❑
4a
Et'sos
o~
o V
a
F w
❑
a
I
❑
a Q
Eb'608
+ a
w
z
(Z-V) 06'L08:inn /WI
0
a
❑—
0w
co
lV#MH
O
C
a' m
LL
Z
G
M
00
= w
w
w
EZ'808
—
_
w
m M)
0
0£'8b+0 V1S
b
w
EZ'808
)
U
w
a
0
0—
a
I�
a
80'L08
0
_
80'L09
N
+
�n
co
o
W
u0
co
0 M
co co
o
co
u0 0
c0 00
W
O
0 00
O

O�
awe z
/
co
of ¢� O� p m w w
U Iw dw LJL 7 w a p p7 / \
w W� WQ L� U Z Z z Zp
F a0 Fy O =Y =J
w
gw'0 w0, OZ OR �OU
O �m�O O� OOf \
❑ ag 0a 0a of g 0 o zD zW ¢ /
Z LU QJ d� d� 0 J d (n K ppLU
pw
J / /
i
Y
0
N
U)
Z
0
U
L,
N
Z cop
— m
LO
QID
U)
O
F
W
Z N
�w
[C
F.
Q
Z
p
UAW
Q
o 0
pp
W
o
o
02
LL
O
a
8
c
F
Q
d
N
m O
z
w
�¢
a�
z0
z
�a
00
U
�
m w
w
U
w
i 3
`
"e •
N N
vV
N
ir
L1oo

U)
z
O
U
W
CO
p LO U)
Q O
m F.
0wU U x
pz p
Utz Q o U
p W o
p J
LL
p 02 O 8
Q N
d
O
F N
U > ..
Q m i
a o
U
a O
a
QW
~
C
Z�
Z
Q
u7i
Oo
U m ui
� w
� U
U i 3
"• N N
N O
N
e V
iv
F
7
E
E
3 u
U o 0
U) � 7 V
00 co co co
M M N N
co co co co co co
N
U
0
�
U
w
z
O
-
U)
-
i
U
W
'^
v J
F-
o
- o
U
=
Z
�
w
�
L)
w
00 00 co Q
Ca
co 00
co
p co 000 00 00
p
J
U
W
dU
U
O
W
p
a
O
�
a
O
O
z
U)
X
W

�y
• .• "`�� use 6��.� 1tIL•i�\■ �-� acres■ ir5
all
vau�s�u�- z ��:.,:-`���. i �-.ate ���r- w.��u uy�■
�rr�v�Q�r�l:®�✓®� rim w.�O�liiil�r��. Ir•�
��.®�� �-��. .ram �`����� �r� ��■�-.
Ban-
M..���� _ •
.,
•
- r i
-. -. . •-
' - 1
i
M��rr

U)
Z
0
U
W
CO
0 LO CO
Q O
m F.
owU U x
pZ o
U<Z Q
p o v
pw o
LL
J p 02 O 8
Q N
a c
F N
U > ..
a m i
a o
U
a O
Q a
Z� ¢W
C ~
O Z
N
t w 4
U 0
F O
a O O
0 ¢ U) U m Quj
d Z d w
1 am0
Q I O� W 99'908 N �,
m I tq 98'908 + V N
w
Z �wz c
0 J 4-J) 98'908 :NI /WI I a > 3: <
w w Z-� #MH w U a o
I LL'909 O c
m a lL'909 +
LL ui 0 � I mc9a E m
_ w � z_ �uaiw 0 zw
a W J 2 �I �a� ° o0
w wa
a p 0 O -1 w L9'908 LO U
I V!NLS'908
+
IL WU _ z a
VJo0
_ ww Ir f flfio
aa ZV908 o,
v
O Ja of Cl)
a \ Z l908 Ce)
o M� \ >
y J @ ( lI a z9 bog
Z cy)
11
Z I N
— LL 00 D I ° U 0
z w I W 0U) ui
_ � ls'£08 O ¢
2w Z I 0 ls'£09 + U
0 OfU
w m z a U
a c~i m Q
D
o p U Z ( o 19 £09 L
o O I L9'£08 + C
¢ G
w v — U)1
a.
U)0 O (Z-3)08'l08:in ANI l oZ'Z08 0
IL w 0i 6 #MH OZ'Zo8 +
0 a U
w 0
0 a 0
a 8L' l08 'ATI3 6L' LOS C3
0 90'09+o bid sc cos +o
a p to
w M
— U) I
O
W I SL'L08 O
a 9L'lo8
N
t
O
�2 o in o in
�IJ �IJ 7 V M M N N O O O
W o� W co c0 c0 co co co co 00 00 I�

U)
z
0
U
W
CO
Q LO CO
Q O
m F.
OwU U x
pZ Q
U<Z Q
p o U
Q W o
J p 02 O 8
N
a c
F N
Q m i
a o
U
Q a O
Q ¢ a
a
Z
O z
U w a
W O O
F
W d U m iu
0: W w
O F w
U i 3
Z O
u, _o 0 a o LO
a) o � r ,� rn o
00 00 X 00 00 M II v p N
U
W � 3
/ C
W �
oZ
o O E..
o
ew
U
C) U O o 0
o LU w
U) U
00 00 00 w r- L)
H
17 o N o W In O 0 o
W W 00 J 00 c0 W
U
O \ o
J
— LL �
w
I I
2
C7 \ w
_ \`\
wQ Z O
p�
w U o
0 W
n-
o
vJ U
L U
W
W °� F
In C. In U o In o w In CDU F w
OD OD co co ro X N o� o� Q� p w Z
= J Z Z F U
U z LL—wO
H � _
O
O co QW
X LL X co CO
w
>Q O
J
n

(3 Stantec
Attachment 2:
Off -Site Analysis: North Carolina

® Stantec
Additional Offsite Alternatives Analysis - Charlotte Region
The following summary provides the research and analysis performed while choosing a project location
within the Charlotte Region of North Carolina.
Initial analysis for available parcels includes:
1. A need for additional data storage must be identified in a region. Because the Charlotte, North Carolina
area was identified as requiring additional data storage, a search for locations began in this area.
2. Access to long -haul fiber. These fiber lines follow specific routes and limit the areas where data centers
can be located. An example of the long -haul fiber lines available in the Charlotte Region is provided in
Appendix A on Figure 1.
3. Access to sanitary sewer and water lines. This criteria limits the location of parcels to areas within an
urban service area as defined by a locality. Urban service areas are generally clustered along main
access roads and within cities and towns.
4. Access to electrical transmission lines. Access to 256 kV power is required for data center campuses.
Land needs to be located adjacent to or near an existing power line. Creating a new transmission line is
avoided when possible because the energy company would have to obtain a certificate of
environmental compatibility and public convenience and necessity from the NC Utilities Commission, a
process including the preparation of a detailed application with numerous alignment options that can
take up to 24 months. Once the certificate is approved, the process of obtaining easements from
affected property owners and eventual construction of the line can extend the timeline by 12 to 18
months. In addition, energy companies typically have their own long-term plans and are not open to
modifying their plans for a single project. A map of the locations of electrical transmission lines in the
Charlotte, NC region is provided in Appendix A on Figure 2.
5. Parcels that ideally intersect all three of the above requirements or are adjacent to them.
6. Available land that meets or exceeds a certain acreage. Based on recent projects, 100 acres or more is
optimal to allow for the construction of five-48 MW data centers with a substation and stormwater
management ponds while avoiding jurisdictional features.
7. Avoidance of potentially hazardous sites or environmental justice sites within the vicinity.
8. Avoidance of potential environmental issues (wetlands/waters of the US, other environmental issues,
cultural resources, or endangered species).
Counties such as Cabarrus and Gaston which are located closer to Charlotte have been growing at a faster
rate and are deterring industrial development which has forced industrial and manufacturing developers to
focus on the counties further away from the city.
Rowan Countv
The initial land search in Rowan County, NC, included a limited number of large parcels or multiple parcel
compilations located along or near the 185 corridor. This area contains access to long -haul fiber lines,
electrical transmission lines (Appendix A; Figures 1 and 2), access to sanitary sewer and water lines
(Appendix B; Figures 1 and 2). As potential parcels were assessed, the additional presence of an airport,
railways and major natural gas pipelines limited development on the parcels that met the required criteria.
Airports pose a risk of crashes within the takeoff and landing zones and railways are used to transport
hazardous materials. Natural gas pipelines are also considered a hazard and are avoided. There are
required building safety setbacks in excess of 200 feet from the centerline of a natural gas line, which
Design with community in mind

® Stantec
indicates how dangerous building in the proximity can be and it also greatly affects buildable area. Figures
showing the locations of these hazards are provided in Appendix A on Figures 3 and 4 and in Appendix B
on Figure 4. At the time Rowan County was attracting a lot of developer interest, and this led to competition
for available land resources. Acquiring land was a struggle due to quick turnover of industrial properties and
this led to an expansion of the search area to surrounding counties.
Iredell County
The search also included the Statesville area in Iredell County. Long -haul fiber is generally located along
Interstate 40 in this area (Appendix A; Figure1). The Statesville urban services area straddles the
intersection of Interstates 40 and 77 (Appendix C; Figure 1). There is an airport located on the southeast
side of 140 which also restricted the search area (Appendix C; Figure 2). Because there are also limited
existing electrical transmission lines that intersect with the Statesville urban service area (Appendix A;
Figure 2), a single potential parcel was identified which would have required a rezoning from agricultural
use to an industrial use. As no other parcels were identified within the required 12.5 miles (20 km) to
maintain latency, development in this area was eliminated.
Lincoln Count
The areas within Lincoln County that offer access to sanitary sewer and water lines are limited to properties
within the city of Lincolnton (Appendix D; Figure 1) and near Lake Norman in the east of the County
(Appendix D; Figure 2). Fiber lines and electrical transmission lines are also located in and around
Lincolnton and near Lake Norman in the east (Appendix A; Figures 1 and 2). The electrical transmission
lines are maintained by the city rather than the utility which adds a layer of coordination required for access
to electricity. The Lake Norman area also has an interstate natural gas line across the area crossing from
the southeast to northwest and a railway line following along NC Highway 16. (Appendix A; Figures 3 and
4).
Industrial zoned parcels within the urban service areas are limited (Appendix D; Figures 3 and 4). Industrial
uses are allowed under the GMC (General Manufacturing and Commercial District) zoning in the City of
Lincolnton and under IC (Industrial Center) in the county of Lincoln. Data centers are not listed as a by -right
use under either industrial zoning and would require the submittal and approval of a conditional use permit.
Within Lincoln County, only four potential sites were identified. Of these, two were in Riverbend Preserve, a
highly controversial development with the local citizens. Microsoft prides itself on building positive
connections in the communities in which it's data centers are located; therefore, these parcels were not
investigated any further. The other two parcels were in the Indian Creek Industrial Park and were
purchased by another buyer before any decisions by MSFT were made.
Catawba Countv
The availability of sanitary sewer and water in multiple, separate jurisdictions within Catawba County (cities
of Hickory, Conover, Newton, Claremont and the towns of Maiden, Brookford, Long View and Catawba)
allowed for more opportunities to find sites meeting the required criteria (Appendix E; Figure 1). Fiber lines
and electrical transmission lines are also located within all of these jurisdictions (Appendix A; Figures 1 and
2). Natural gas lines are limited to a small area in the southeast of the county (Appendix A; Figure 3). The
availability of multiple jurisdictions and their sizes limited the impact of the rail lines (Appendix A; Figure 4).
Catawba County also offered many large, rural parcels that were zoned for industrial use. Examples of local
zoning maps are provided in Appendix E on Figures 2 and 3. In addition, Catawba County already has data
centers located within it and this familiarity made coordination with the jurisdictions easier. Data centers are
already listed as allowed uses within industrial districts in multiple jurisdictions thereby limiting the need for
rezoning or conditional use permits (for example, the City of Conover, Town of Maiden).
Design with community in mind

® Stantec
APPENDIX A -Infrastructure Maps:
Charlotte Region
Design with community in mind

.+
i
� f �
w
U)
i C
w
W
C}
J
~
I

A,
u
I
►1
IN
ti
I )zl
r L f
� JI�1
C
i
Z F
7
w
O Y = O
O o
Q N W
C) O �
U) d
ID
O Q Q
IL
� U
U'
� w �
Q
5 <
O O � Z
C7 H
0 W
U 2
00
Z LL
(B
N
(B
O
O
Ln
>
=
O
m
2
O
=
L
O
o
U
1
I
I
LA
N
J
C
O
U)
D
E
C
O
O
>_
O
O
(D
Y
Y
O
a
cfl
00
U_
CV
L
O
O
NO
N
N
W
,,I-
C6
I
I
c

oe
/�\
\
�
/\-
� ��
CL
`
) 2
\
f.
_
�|
.12

L
LL
Q
L(i
V
00
c+i
N
LO
WN
L
CD
c
W
Q
N
w
C
0
a_

® Stantec
APPENDIX B -Rowan County Maps
Design with community in mind

cn
cn
m

V
LL
■
�
■
0
�
�
c
�
0
U
c
■
■
0
w

® Stantec
APPENDIX C - Iredell County Maps
Design with community in mind

Y �ir
IM �
:Yi" r• '•,. -ram' � '�'i � a;' 1'� �, -
k`Vr
tktl
\.:VoO91 y a �n �e d'�• - ram; �� C',,. � �- � �'J t � i� � ,
Print • scale is approximate.
layoutCritical or
activities should not be done usinq
1rt�i��LL

Map Theme Legends
Urban Service Areas (USA)
Statesville USA
0 Statesville USA Long Range
Troutman USA
0 Mooresville USA

Iredell County, North Carolina Figure 2 August 17, 2023
Iredell County Airport Overlay
+ Point ,SS7 2154
f + Scotts
TS37
1537 1307 �}
534 Lnray
0
� r
Sta esville 5tatesvil le — — — — —
es��i
jri
T;
1505
13b5
15Fi6 !- 0
f , II�""'I'I E!
Eufola +•
, 3T7 18 R,uM SPj11HGS
24Uj
N Troutman
1324
21
l 13i2 1
Long Isiand
Ia:rJ •` I
East Monbo i
� , 3-71314
s�
-
4
ti Crossroads V
,44r
211" = 12000 ft
Print map scale is approximate.
Critical layout or measurement
activities should not be done using
this resource.
MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY
NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT
Iredell County, North Carolina makes no claims and no
warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the validity or
accuracy of the G IS data presented on this map.
Geometry updated 06/05/2023
Data updated 08/03/2023

Map Theme Legends
Statesville Airport Approach Zones
Runway
Non -Precision Instrument Runway Approach Zone
Precision Instrument Runway Approach Zone
Conical Zone
m Horizontal Zone
> Primary Zone
Transitional Zone

® Stantec
APPENDIX D -Lincoln County Maps
Design with community in mind

LINK
...80
Nq�'l VmAll IQ
41
L)R
' 4-Z.,
'e nos
0
LLJ
LLJ
-ZZC SHO
olvK51
io
NV �kD
HUWARD T.; us
U-,
Coll
T5
e, ka
t10 4#1
R 0 V7
Yo
P.
-qf)
S
-17
fvmo 'Vvj'
R tv
ok
RE)
Gt:) 'WacoO�q S&.
'491
reeki 105
w
E
Un
CD
CD
El

N
e
'n-
aaE�
U�cr
ZH,R8
��= m E
G C o�S
� v
UE�
�aq
41
O o
E ~
L�iu�q
vs�
U vk J d
U ❑
z
2•
CM
O
V
N
01
N
U)
—
�
w
Q

Y� r
F
q
~
~�
a
r
°one
u-
LU
M
S
t
... i111"�O IN
WILL
IiSD� 5T
�k0�
rr
3/J1*1
6
0
LO
N
Ln
p r z
0
U
C
0
o Q C
J
N
w
El

\/
E 2
.. .
\kk
.&
4 _,
\
\v
CO::j
.
iM
■}j\\\/tcn
■■0�&
. Cl
. . �
�
] •
'
' 014JAW
/
. � ■
�
—1. r
40
al
,k-4
,
V-�=2
2 \)j
a -t
§�E
�zz=
U X
Lo
E �X.1/Z
§ 2)a!
U {ELLn
�2M±�
E2/;
j xEf 2
� 2L
§
{._
0 E
cuem
u ..s
§B$#
QI®\
■

® Stantec
APPENDIX E -Catawba County Maps
Design with community in mind

LL
A
G
a1
Qgg
U &
WVW o j,
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ o
a

v
LL
—
E
�p
V
M
a
E pE
S
o 2 c c
c
A
E E
__°
❑ e ❑
m
■ ■ ■ I
■
■

M £zoz •iiaav o s1:)1a#s10 f5u1uoz k
k 11 M----"a `a aM P`aa"aa
L VNIIOHVD HAON i"k at a == x #
�19AONOO �O X11 r i OP@
ip� a a
ry ... -...
....... ..........
mm..-- - .- - - - - -. --- --,- -.F.. ... --- - ! - .. --- ------------ -- ---- ----- - - ------ --
.• - ---- - - I. --.---mm
- --� - --- ---- -------- -- --- - ..
L
--------- _; __ =
. 1
.r--v ---------------- ...........
.3' .. {. ...... - ......... �[ .
� .tip- s�.,r.r:;... - T•y }
- -`a
447
'S
oil; ` f
i
V
foil
i 8
i
i..,® of
• � i
aa rcrc ss�5 rt,,
8
OMN
�11111
Z��;;, ,
0
u�j' l
i
W
0CL
N
O C
{
U— %
E �x

Swinging 6rid9a Re --. os' �FT� ¢-
Ftu m
_ grrarm Rd - b� �"
it�b
na C43na Rd
PMa 1'0
4 N
14rAe Ara
ac � �i yom= Crionty HameA V NAshe Ara G
atb Aredw P^l8 uaM4uoN
C P`
¢ Cl a
F
ID Gti g
b �
i - N,
o a
m a � m yry rAd =
� � w
,Foe, = PN Pootneiga PBFa
LM
b
3N R'a'Id PFou epely O Q
qr St❑aW N E' Sti 3 LL hPuddl'.Geak. z
V
D
3N.P F � Aoginson Rd
�' Sya OYyd SE � y
E -
zs
2
�av t drh St SE
C ,
Seh 5t
s a v i xn
'dW,A+a 4av 3 = a e
ryyrp® ' rAs is v+v -R' ID t E Pa
❑: 3
Sid
O
},Ip us-azt Nw j
xo I � 3 �eF g 3R
w
erad m
o a
Pall 7ep Aa 0. _
t91a r :
a r46 I A8
� a
i f
o
®©C

(3 Stantec
Attachment 3:
Table 10 Revised

u
a)
41
-J
V)
T
MD
U
N
m
@
O
U
a
m
X
o
E
@ a
c .>
m
O
t
a
d
y
= o
N a
YI
T
3
i0 0
a
O
D_
(`
LL
J
t Z
U
IL
O O
j E
y
0
O
N
N
O O
p
U E
O
O
O
O.
W
C U
N
U
d a
@ @
0
U
C
r0
Q
°'
E
N J r
3
w
E E
00
a
T
o
c 3
N
O O
J
Y 2'
2i
d
N
o E
n
0 m@
w
Y Y
5 U
m
@ 0
Q
rn M
E 2
m
N
x
w
a
Z p
Z d
D a y
Z
U
O U
`1
@
N
@
O LL
O
N Q @
D!
W
E E
Q
w
E E
U
@
N
J
C
Ul
l0
E
J
N O
O
@ a
@ a
L r c
¢
n ro
d d
u>
J
(7
o
w
w
m
m N
0
m E;
iq o
t0
T
°3 c
y
a
E
E y
p—
O
a O
O m
.�
z
0
.3
U
3 c
EE
c
0
p@
ti
0 o
E
o
d
0
0 3
Q o
N a
r0
^
f6 01
c
d C
N
O
Q
T J
C 3 3
N
N
U U
E E
-
V
O o
N
N
O
N d
O
O
a C
'X U
@ .@.• J
s
LU
ap
v
E E
y
@
N
C
@ 3
@ y
K
W
a
Z
c
Z N @
c
U O a
W
E E
¢
E E
@
N
U
E
N N
N\ N
L U V
m
m C 0
N @ O.
%
T p
Z
a
E
x N
U
N
O
O @
@ C
L
3 a
O
@
@ U
L
'O
N
N
0
C
T
T
=
0
0O
c
O
0
ao
O
rn o
a LL
rn o
0. N
c
N
E
`O_ O_
N_
C
O J
O
O
U U
N
F a
O) 0
@
(O
a
@ C
@ a v
@ Q .0
F
O O
a
C y
E
O
E y
y
a
O O
N
>�
>
N O
O O.
N
>
'y
U
40i
Z 3
Z 3 E
m N
Z
W�
U
O
N
C
w
c 0
O
W
E E
M
_
E O
@
l6
U
N
@
O
O Q
O
O Q N
N
L @ O
J
N V
y
U
E
y
V
ry N LL
.@-• U O-
Q
O
w
m 0
m O J
(n O O
@
@
@
N
c_
@ Y
E 9 r
O
0
@
a
N
y @ C p
X d
y
C
O
@
y
LL
J
r
@ O
c U O_ @
o.
y
a 0
3 E
00
rn
3
d
o o p- @
0 0
0
=
L
`o
2
V@ 0 m
E
`m
J >
@
c
Q
we
LL
o
-
m
U .0 m m w N
E
@
a
O
O
@ N 2 p @ O
m
U U
m
@ J
e
oa m N
w
E E
a
U Q
O
0
Q
O K
-@
.O-. Z
c Cp @ E
-y
y E
cl O
0
w
Q
'a d
2
d a 5 c o
W
M
O. .L.
c
%
0
O
a N
3 N
@ @ 0 O @ 0
06
W
W
E E
w
>
'�
N
ay-•
J
Q p
r L E U K
w
4
t0
N
N
N
M O
O
N
N
E
O
£
N N
LL O)
O N
O
t O CO
F C 6 U @
d E
L
N
9
$
7
O
N
O
O
N
U V
V
•C �
E rvQ
Y
IM
a
E O
v
dLL
o
r N
L' 2 a
p
K
o
~
u u Y
2
p 0
E
-O
c
'k N
O
E 0
7
a 7�
O IT 0
_
_
c •y
p
U
0 rL N
a
a C O
2
f A C f
N
4
W IL
Q
a Q G
7
9- O
r
N
O
aL.•
C
@
a
w
ca
Q
O
N
co
L
3
U
E
C
L
E
N
(6
O
a
E
r
O
LL
LO
co
m
U
aZ
E @
a
0 C
0
O
C CD
N
U 0.
o 0.
N
0).2
O X
N
C C
r ca
mN
c
W
f6 �
U U
O @
O :u
a`¢
D

u
a1
4J
fG
N
000
C C V
d U
m
!Ec
c
3
� J
N
L E U
y a C N
m
W
E
a)
O U£
OTI U «O M
N 0 m
O
a
LL
C _ L
LU
j
w
>
o p 0
0 0 m ocF
rn
E
M
N N V
N L U N
w
'R 2
a
m c O E
O
n
o d
a
o o N E c
y
co
E o m
7
m
Q
m m
w
N «O >
« 32 Z N
,X
LU
O
Q
O m
Q U d
Z
z
a
m
U
y
U
m N
m m
N E ai
a� n
J
N E J
o m
L C mo
a
N m
c E m
E a a
v
m
M.
m
c m
a o
L
N
Y C N
W
f
c N N
O 'O
T O
T M
C
aUt
U)
_0m
$ d` d
c d No
m
j
N r�
U .N
W a
O m
y O C
v
m
Q
@ «O C
J Ol
0 C
d
-
c
W
L V d
al m
m
C
-i
m 3
mm y
2 m
w �D
y
w
zo
m�
U
y
C
E O) O
w
N C M
m
N
E T C
N m
U
C Qf
N m 0
L
N
n m
m
E
RN
C
m
'
C
y 0
N L a
N
O-E N
O o s
.y N
O N
W
GO C
N
6 L
~
NLU
O
o V
OTl N
a
c t m
y
U r
m w
LU
n
aci
m d
N
m y
o
o
w
r$
c o a
o m
F
m m
N C> N
N N 1]
Q
fn m
W a n
W U' y
z
D ry L C V
O d V o T l0
O
O
m
C m C c0 y L 0
L O
O N
U
U J a M N O U
N 0 Y
m :? m x d
c y
o
N
m 0 UO 3: J Z £
o m C O)
'm0
J
c a m a1 N m m
rp L
E �O
GO @ V U
E
L
m
a U
r O U O C Q a
'E C m
O
O
O
O
LU
fn
O O O
F
«O
Z
m _ N m m E
3 a' E
m
in
y
N N '> t6 `O C ?�
OT) m
m
K
c rn o a N
L
c J m
a
WC
N `
X 30 U N U 6 C
W N« a
o O C Qf
O)
LL
W
m
L_
m 3 m N
J W 01 3 L
Y« ti o
0 J a o
C
N
N
4
3 3
lL N N 2 N O V 0.
Q N m O.
W
Y
�
a1
Y
v
V m
Q
�
w
U
G N
•y m wed,
` �G'. N
� u
W
U E J
p
F
m« m e
d c a
�
a
Y
E CL E

(3 Stantec
Attachment 4:
Cultural Resource Surveys

® Stantec
A Phase I Architectural Survey
Associated with the
Approximately 292-Acre
Parcel Associated with the
Proposed Maidens Data
Center (CLT10) in Catawba
County, North Carolina
March 14, 2023
Prepared for:
LexiJones
Microsoft Corporation
[phone]
Prepared by:
Sandra DeChard, Senior
Architectural Historian
and
Brynn Stewart, Senior Principal
Investigator
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5209 Center Street
Williamsburg, VA 22188
[phone]

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
The conclusions in the Report are Stantec's professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning
the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information
existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The
Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which
the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the
project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient's own risk.
Stantec has assumed all information received from the Client and third parties in the preparation of the Report
to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such
information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained
therein.
This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec's contract with the Client.
While the Report may be provided to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and others for whom the Client
is responsible, Stantec does not warrant the services to any third party. The report may not be relied upon by
any other party without the express written consent of Stantec, which may be withheld at Stantec's discretion.
4
Prepared by
Sandra DeChard, Senior Architectural Historian
Reviewed by
Brynn Stewart, MA, Senior Principal Investigator
Approved by
Loretta Cummings, Principal

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...........................................................................................................III
ABBREVIATIONS..................................................................................................................... V
1.0 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1.1
2.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................2.3
2.1 DEFINITIONS...............................................................................................................2.3
2.2 OBJECTIVES...............................................................................................................2.3
3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT................................................................................................3.5
3.1 OVERVIEW OF CATAWBA COUNTY..........................................................................3.5
4.0 ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT.....................................................................................4.8
4.1 AGRICULTURAL HISTORY.........................................................................................4.8
4.2 RESIDENTIAL HISTORY.............................................................................................4.8
5.0 PROPERTY TYPES...................................................................................................5.12
5.1.1 Nineteenth Century Residential Architecture Types..................................5.12
5.1.2 Twentieth Century Residential Architectural Styles...................................5.14
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................6.26
7.0 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................7.1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. NRHP Recommendations for Architectural Resources Surveyed within the
SurveyArea.............................................................................................................6.27
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location.........................................................................................................1.2
Figure 2 Detail of Map of Catawba County, North Carolina, Depicting the Railroad Lines
in Catawba County (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map
Division).....................................................................................................................3.7
Figure 3 Detail of Map of Catawba County, North Carolina, Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division)..................4.9
Figure 4 Detail of Maiden, NC USGS Topographic Map 1:24000 (1970;
https://Iivingatlas.arcgis.com/topoexplorer/index.html).............................................4.10
Figure 5 Detail of 2022 Google Earth Aerial Map Depicting the Residential and
Commercial Development to the South and Southeast of the Proposed Project
Area (Google Earth 2023)........................................................................................4.11
Figure 6 Parker House (CT0764), 1670 W. Maiden Road, View Looking Northeast...............5.13

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Figure 7 Vernacular Farmhouse (CT1830), 1109 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Southwest......................................... ... ....................................................................
5.14
Figure 8 Front Gable Bungalow (CT1827), 1120 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Northwest................................................................................................................5.15
Figure 9 Minimal Traditional Dwelling (CT1826), 3335 US 321, View Looking Southwest ......
5.16
Figure 10 Minimal Traditional Dwelling (CT1829), 1370 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Northwest................................................................................................................5.17
Figure 11 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1818), 1106 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Northeast.................................................................................................................
5.18
Figure 12 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1819), 1098 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest................................................................................................................5.19
Figure 13 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1820), 1088 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest................................................................................................................
5.19
Figure 14 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1821), 1073 Springdale Drive, View Looking West ........
5.20
Figure 15 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1822), 1068 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest................................................................................................................
5.21
Figure 16 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1823), 1058 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Northwest................................................................................................................
5.22
Figure 17 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1824), 1050 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest................................................................................................................
5.23
Figure 18 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1828), 3108 Rome Jones Road, View Looking
Northwest................................................................................................................5.24
Figure 19 Split -Level Dwelling (CT1825), 1044 Springdale Drive, View Looking West ...........
5.25
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY MAPPING...............................A.1
APPENDIX B KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES.................................................................. B.2

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Executive Summary
On November 29, 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) conducted a Phase I architectural
resources survey for the Maidens Site (CLT10; the Project), a proposed data center in Catawba County,
North Carolina. The survey included the approximately 292-acre Project site (Project Area) and resources
on adjacent parcels or within view of the proposed Project site (Study Area). The Project is located
approximately 1.25 miles northwest of the town of Maiden, and as currently designed, will be comprised
of five data center buildings, each with five colos and one administrative building with a total capacity of
240MW. The Project Area terrain consists of woodland, previously logged areas, and overgrown brush.
The Project Area is bounded to the south by West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east
by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor
and private parcels. The work was conducted at the request of Microsoft Corporation (Client).
Architecture Resources
The defined Study Area for architectural survey included the entire approximately 292-acre Project Area
as well as resources located on adjacent parcels or within view of the proposed Project Area. Thirteen
new individual resources, based on tax parcel data and the field survey, were located within the
architectural Survey Area. Background research conducted on the North Carolina Historic Preservation
Office's (NC HPO's) HPOWEB database indicated that one previously recorded resource was located
within the Study Area.
The 14 individual recorded resources, based on the current survey, are generally reflective of the mid -
nineteenth to mid -twentieth century development of Catawba County, and lack direct and/or important
associations under Criterion A, B, or C for historical significance necessary for listing on the NRHP. As
such, it is recommended that the resources are not individually eligible for listing on the NRHP. Criterion
D, typically associated with archaeological sites, was not considered in evaluating the architectural
resources documented during the survey.
No further architectural survey work is recommended as part of the CLT17 project.
HPO #
Resource Name/Address
Date
Tax Parcel ID
NRHP Recommendation
as a Result of the Survey
CT0764
Parker House and Farm, 1670
c. 1900
363710467856
Recommended Not Eligible
W. Maiden Road
for Listing on the NRHP
Recommended Not Eligible
CT1818
House, 1106 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090143
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1819
House, 1098 Springdale Drive
1958/1987
364705090241
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1820
House, 1088 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090331
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1821
House, 1073 Springdale Drive
1963/1993
364705090431
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
HPO #
Resource Name/Address
Date
Tax Parcel ID
NRHP Recommendation
as a Result of the Survey
CT1822
House, 1068 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090521
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1823
House, 1058 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090631
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1824
House, 1050 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090750
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1825
House, 1044 Springdale Drive
1960
364705090883
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1826
House, 3335 US 321
1948
364817003061
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1827
House, 1120 Zeb Haynes Road
c. 1930
363708993172
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1828
House, 3108 Rome Jones Road
1967
363819514781
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1829
House, 1370 Zeb Haynes Road
1950
363711669790
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1830
Farm, 1109 Zeb Haynes Road
1880
363708987536
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listinq on the NRHP
iv

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Abbreviations
GIS
NCHPO
n.d.
NHL
NHPA
NRHP
ROW
Stantec
USDI
USGS
Geographic Information System
North Carolina Historic Preservation Office
no date
National Historic Landmark
National Historic Preservation Act
National Register of Historic Places
Right of Way
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
United States Department of the Interior
United States Geological Survey
v

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On November 29, 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) conducted a Phase I architectural
resources survey for the Maidens Site (CLT10; the Project), a proposed data center in Catawba County,
North Carolina. The survey included the approximately 292-acre Project site (Project Area) and resources
on adjacent parcels or within view of the proposed Project site (Study Area). The Project is located
approximately 1.25 miles northwest of the town of Maiden, and as currently designed, will be comprised
of five data center buildings, each with five colos and one administrative building with a total capacity of
240MW. The Project Area terrain consists of woodland, previously logged areas, and overgrown brush.
The Project Area is bounded to the south by West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east
by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor
and private parcels. The work was conducted at the request of Microsoft Corporation (Client).
Stantec designed the architectural survey to identify historic architectural resources 50 years old or over
that may be present in the Project and Study areas and obtain sufficient information to make
recommendations on their potential eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). To
accomplish this, both documentary research and cultural resources survey were conducted in compliance
with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA-PL89-665), as amended, the Archeological
and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, Executive Order 11593, relevant sections of 36 CFR 60 and 36
CFR 800, and state (North Carolina Historic Preservation Office's (NCHPO) Architectural Survey Manual
[2021 ]) and Report Standards for Historic Structure Survey Reports/Determination of Eligibility/Section
1061110 Compliance Reports in North Carolina [2019], and federal (Secretary of the Interior's Standards
and Guidelines for -Archaeology and Historic Preservation [United States Department of the Interior
{USDI) 1983]) guidelines for conducting cultural resources investigations and National Register Bulletin
15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (USDI 2002).
Senior Principal Investigator Brynn Stewart oversaw the project. Senior Architectural Historian Sandra
DeChard authored the report. Ms. DeChard oversaw the architectural fieldwork conducted by
Architectural History Technician Olivia McCarty. GIS Analyst Elise Ljiko prepared the report graphics and
project maps. Copies of all field notes, maps, correspondence, and historical research materials are on
file at Stantec's office in Richmond, Virginia.
1.1

.•+ Off( 11 �� '��y4� � ��
R
.�� :�-♦ � � " � ` ter, ` :.' r.
VP
k'
wk
40
410��"
��� ,� •s��•
.ram
i I ���� - {��-� '�I —�I`�� —
t
� ' y
•
J 1V
1 � � ,�jVdy' y � i
—�� � I ,fr�`Y f� "�•`i � � �r
f �"°' �_ . _ • , �' ~ 'dell
Vi
0 1,000 2,000 N
CProject Area Feet
(At original document size of 8.SxI I)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
CIIIIIIProject 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Microsoft, NC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Tdle
Project Location Map
Page 1.2
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
2.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The Phase I field survey strategy consisted of a systematic identification of potential historic architectural
resources dating to 50 years or older located within the Study Area utilizing tax parcel and HPOWEB
database data. One previously recorded resource was identified on a parcel which had the potential to
view the proposed project. Newly identified resources within the architecture Study Area were
documented and the information recorded on the NCHPO Historic Property Field Data Form. Sketch plan
maps were drawn for each newly recorded resource and the buildings/structures photographed as visible.
The Phase I architectural survey was conducted from public ROW only unless permission was specifically
granted by the owner at the time of the field survey.
2.1 DEFINITIONS
Architectural resources include all standing structures or buildings that are 50 years or older. Potential
eligibility of architectural resources requires that one or more of the NRHP Criteria, such as association
with significant events in the broad patterns of national history (Criterion A), association with the lives of
persons significant in our past (Criterion B), and/or representative of a type, period, or method of
construction, or the work of a master (Criterion C), be met. Where individual structures do not meet these
National Register criteria, but constitute a cohesive group of related buildings, a potential NRHP district
may be considered.
2.2 OBJECTIVES
The Phase I survey was designed to locate and identify architectural resources within the Project Area, as
well as to document any standing structures 50 years of age or older located within the Project and Study
areas. Stantec designed the survey to obtain sufficient information to make recommendations about the
research potential of identified cultural resources based on each resource's potential eligibility for listing
on the NRHP. A cultural resource is gauged to be significant if it meets at least one of four NRHP criteria:
Criterion A: Associated with significant events in the broad patterns of national history.
Criterion B: Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
Criterion C: Representative of a type, period, or method of construction, or the work of a
master.
Criterion D: Capable of yielding important information about the past.
Where individual structures do not meet these NRHP criteria, but constitute a cohesive group of related
buildings, a potential NRHP district may be considered. The resource, to be eligible, must also have a
high degree of integrity. The seven aspects of integrity, which conveys the historical significance of the
resource's original design, include location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling and
2.3

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
association. The resource should meet at least five of these aspects to be considered to have a high level
of integrity. As part of the assessment of each resource's potential NRHP eligibility, the seven aspects of
integrity - location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association - were applied to
identify those primary qualities and characteristics that qualify the resource for listing on the NRHP. The
seven aspects of integrity, according to the NRHP, are defined below (USDI 2002):
Location: Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where
the historic event took place. Integrity of location refers to whether the property has been moved
or relocated since its construction.
Design: Design is the composition of elements that constitute the form, plan, space, structure,
and style of a property.
Setting: Setting is the physical environment of a historic property that illustrates the character of
the place.
Materials: Materials are the physical elements combined in a particular pattern or configuration to
form the aid during a period in the past. Integrity of materials determines whether or not an
authentic historic resource still exists.
Workmanship: Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or
people during any given period of history.
Feeling: Feeling is the quality that a historic property has in evoking the aesthetic or historic
sense of a past period of time. Although it is itself intangible, feeling is dependent upon the
significant physical characteristics that convey historic qualities.
Association: Association is the direct link between a property and the event or person for which
the property is significant.
2.4

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT
3.1 OVERVIEW OF CATAWBA COUNTY
Prior to its formation in 1842, the area that would become Catawba County was settled by Swiss and
Scotch -Irish settlers along with German pioneers from Pennsylvania, who established several reformed
churches in the first half of the nineteenth century. As the county was rural, farming was the main
occupation, however gold mining was also conducted for a brief time (Bayley 2006; Catawba College
2021; Catawba County Government 2020a; Hahn 1911:7 and 10-11).
However, the residents of what was then the northern area of Lincoln County north of the Catawba River,
began to become increasingly dissatisfied with their access to county services and became increasingly
isolated from the southern half of the county as communities expanded and grew. Efforts to form a new
county to resolve some of these issues was spearheaded by Nathanial Wilson, a descendant of Irish
immigrants, who was elected to the state's House of Commons in 1842 on the promise of splitting off from
Lincoln County (Preslar 1954:219; Corbitt 1987:91; Catawba County Government 2020a).
The petition made by the residents was successful, and at the end of 1842, Catawba County, named after
the Catawba tribe in the area, was officially established. The county was then bounded by Iredell, Lincoln,
Caldwell, Alexander, and Burke counties. In 1845, the new county seat was designated at the town of
Newton, with a courthouse constructed shortly thereafter. It remained the seat of the county until 1924
(Corbitt 1987:92; Preslar 1954:265; Bayley 2006; Catawba County Government 2020a). By the 1850
census, Catawba County residents included 7,293 free individuals, including 21 African American men
and women, and 1,569 enslaved individuals (Hahn 1911:7).
In the mid -nineteenth century, in the decades following the creation of Catawba County, the area outside
of Newton was agrarian with a vast majority of residents employed as farmers or day laborers. During the
mid -nineteenth century, crops included cotton, potatoes, corn, wheat, and other grains, as well as various
fruits. Dairy and cattle farming and bee keeping were also part of the agrarian economy (Hahn 1911:7;
Bayley 2006).
During this time, the town of Newton, one of the few incorporated towns within the county in the mid -
nineteenth century, had approximately 9,065 free residents, including 32 African Americans. The
occupations listed reflect those of a mid -nineteenth century rural town, albeit the county seat, and
included house carpenters, shoe, cabinet, and carriage makers, saddlers, and blacksmiths. Other
occupations included teachers, which suggest the town had a school, a preacher, doctor, tailor, tanner,
hotelier, and stage driver (United States Federal Census 1860; Hahn 1911:7-8). The latter two indicate
Newton had a hotel for passengers traveling by stagecoach from other areas of North Carolina and likely
beyond. In addition, in 1860, approximately 1,664 slaves were enumerated in the census for both the
county and within the town of Newton (United States Federal Census — Slave Schedules 1860).
3.5

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
While Newton remained one of the most populated towns in Catawba County, the towns of Conover,
Catawba, Maiden and Hickory, began to develop in the mid -to late nineteenth century as a result of the
railroad's expansion in the 1880s. In 1886, two main railroads had been constructed and connected at
Newton; the Western North Carolina Railroad, which ran east -west through the five towns, and the
Chester & Lenoir Narrow Gauge Railroad, which ran north -south, and joined the Western North Carolina
Railroad at Newton. Each town had its own depot with intermittent stops along the Western North
Carolina Railroad route. Transportation, in addition to the railroads, also included a network of secondary
roads as well as several ferry crossings on the Catawba River (Yoder 1886; Kooiman 1989; Figure 2).
The 1886 map also depicts the continued agrarian nature of Catawba County with the exception of the
four main towns. While the area was relatively rural, small family -owned stores and numerous churches of
several denominations were dispersed throughout the county. Industries depicted were also likely smaller
ventures and included water powered grist mills along the Catawba River and its tributaries as well as
four, likely larger cotton mills, the Long Island Cotton Mill, Maiden Cotton Mills, Newton Cotton Mills, and
the Monbo Cotton Mill. Other manufacturing included the Weedon Spoke & Handle Factory in Newton,
the Piedmont Wagon Shops in Hickory, and the Smith & Yount Sash Mill in Conover. Several colleges
were also depicted on the map and include Concordia College in Conover, Catawba College in Newton,
and in Hickory, Mt. St. Joseph's College and Claremont College as well as a private school, Highland
Academy (Yoder 1886; Kooiman 1989; Figure 2).
The landscape of Catawba remained rural and agrarian through the remaining decade of the nineteenth
century; however, the population of Catawba County steadily increased. In 1890, just over 18,600
residents lived in the county. By 1910, the number had risen to just under 28,000 (Hahn 1911:8). Farming
still employed most of the residents outside of the four main towns. A majority of the residents in the
surrounding area of Conover, the location of the proposed project, were employed as farmers or farm
laborers. The handle factory and the railroad employed some residents but were a distance second in
total numbers. Others were employed at a wagon factory, in the building trades, and cottage industries
such as blacksmithing, shoe making and as dressmakers (United States Federal Census 1900).
During the next several decades, with the increase in new manufacturing facilities, the rural areas of the
county experienced some residential growth. However, farming still employed a significant number of
residents in the rural areas. By 1930, in and in the vicinity of the towns of Newton and Maiden, a large
number of people were employed at the cotton mill, hosiery, handle, furniture, chair, and glove factories,
the ice and rubber plants, and the railroad. Several other main employers included colleges, sawmills,
and a carriage factory (United States Federal Census 1930).
3.6

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
.__ �'•'r� i � i•w� T ^ it � .i.l�, 't� = i. ��. � '� . ' _ • . +fr n..r
..''' �, ... •."-'-=1� war... •-�.� .t. «� ��y'
Q....,
l�f• +... �. .", .i..�.-" .�Y. cur ...�.'L"^^ - •' .....a ram.-. �� � ..e.. .
North;
Not to Scale �_� of=; _ i, st ��. �, `►
Rey
Figure 2 Detail of Map of Catawba County, North Carolina, Depicting the Railroad Lines in
Catawba County (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division).
Resulting, in part, from the increase in manufacturing, the population of Catawba County as a whole also
increased. In 1930, the county contained just under 44,000 residents. By 1940, the population had
increased to 51,653 and by 1950, to 61,794 (United States Census 1950:33-10). Manufacturing continued
to thrive through the twentieth century, with approximately 40 percent of the population of the county
employed in industrial -related jobs. Agriculture, with advancements in technology and production
methods such as erosion mitigation, diversification of crops, and new ways to maintain healthy soils, also
flourished (Preslar 1954:488-490). While manufacturing increased in the county, the area in the vicinity
remained decidedly agrarian into the mid -to late twentieth century.
In the late twentieth century, Catawba County became more accessible with the construction of I-40
which was completed in the mid-1970s. Today, while still rural in many respects, Catawba County
retains its textile and furniture manufacturing as a major economic base while expanding into the
telecommunications market. Additionally, new business sectors in biomedical and pharmaceutical
manufacturing as well as retail development and marketing efforts to attract tourists and retirees have
expanded the county's economic base. The County has also expanded its infrastructure, improving its
roads and highways, as well as its public education system (Catawba County Government 2020a).
3.7

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
4.0 ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
4.1 AGRICULTURAL HISTORY
Catawba County, historically, was, and continues to be an agrarian county. The agricultural development
in the mid -nineteenth century, and earlier, consisted of small to mid -sized farms and the county was
sparsely settled (Figure 3). Although the types of crops and livestock produced for individual farms in not
easily known, the county as a whole produced potatoes, cotton, and grains were most often grown mainly
on a subsistence level in the early nineteenth century due to the lack of adequate roads. A number of
farms appear to have raised dairy cattle, sheep, and swine (Hahn 1911:7; Bayley 2006; Kooiman 1989).
During the mid -to late nineteenth century, larger farms were becoming more common. Two large farm
parcels in the county belonged to Solomon Warlick, who owned 100 improved acres out of 608 total
acres, and David Barker, who owned 700 unimproved and 100 improved acres.
While the Civil War brought economic hardship to the agricultural industry of the state of North Carolina
as a whole, the residents of Catawba County did not own large numbers of slaves. As a result, the
agricultural economy was quicker to rebound after the Civil War. To maintain agricultural production after
the Civil War with the absence of slave labor, farmers often hired day laborers to help with planting,
harvesting, and day-to-day operations (Kooiman 1989).
The growth of the towns in the early twentieth century drew residents from rural areas to jobs in the more
populated centers. Even with this shift, 88 percent of the workforce in Catawba County continued to be
employed in farming. During the early 1920s, the average area of land under cultivation on agricultural
parcels was 75 acres with approximately 259 farms listed in 1925 (Kooiman 1989).
4.2 RESIDENTIAL HISTORY
Dwellings associated with early to mid -nineteenth century farms were often two-story, three -bay, side
gable, frame residences. Common to this house type, were exterior end chimneys and one-story front
porch. Though these dwellings were often vernacular in appearance, modest Federal and Greek Revival
embellishments were often added. The Frederick William Smith House (CT0794) falls within this house
type. In the time after the Civil War, I -Houses became a popular house type in rural Catawba County.
Weatherboards were the most common sheathing material on houses constructed in the nineteenth
century, both before and after the Civil War (Kooiman 1989).
While farms dotted the landscape during the mid -nineteenth to the mid -twentieth century, non-agricultural
development began to increase, although not substantially, in the areas around the four most populated
towns as well as along major secondary routes during the late nineteenth century. The early to mid -
twentieth century development; however, was not prolific. Even into the latter part of the century, the area
in the vicinity of the proposed Project remained relatively rural with the exception of the village of Rhoney
and a smattering of dwellings along Hickory Lincolnton Highway to the south of the Project Area (Figure
,;

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
4). It was not until the late twentieth to early twenty-first century that residential development increased to
any significance. Today the main areas of development are along Old Stage Road and Hickory Lincolnton
Highway to the south of the intersection with Rocky Ford Road (Figure 5).
While the nineteenth century vernacular dwelling type continued to be constructed on agricultural parcels,
new architectural styles were increasingly becoming popular in the early to mid -twentieth century. The
styles included Colonial Revival and one -and -a -half -story Craftsman bungalows on agricultural parcels as
the main residence, although these styles were more common to domestic parcels instead of rural
agrarian lots (Kooiman 1989). On non -agrarian parcels, mid- to late twentieth century styles were popular
including Minimal Traditional and Ranch -style dwellings.
r o
's .
IL
�'. !
+
14 + AC fAvvaf
l*
N.I.
U
lisp F,
'
# c
4;
}. fflfDr/e,i
r
,if
R fiuwy.trry�
'
F.Ilr'f
Q
fioyrr# �+
�
x
v
�
'�
/ �'JiP
fl {'I7yf[ifi
.Y,MrJihowa
++FIF
,
€�Jrra,+,arll}r} A+,ee
V it . fr rev,
+
44,LdFAi
t 06Ad"rJ" 4
t
f
North;
} o+o
Project Area
Vicinity
Not to Scale
Figure 3 Detail of Map of Catawba County, North Carolina, Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division).
I •

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
VOW
Project Area ~"-•
Vicinity
North; ,•- r r.�. r;. :w' ` '�, s.0 }
Not to Scale '.42.
N b.,.- 11-10
ti
Figure 4 Detail of Maiden, NC USGS Topographic Map 1:24000 (1970;
https://livingatias.arcgis.com/topoexpiorer/index.htm1).
Type text here
4.10

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
Figure 5 Detail of 2022 Google Earth Aerial Map Depicting the Residential and
Commercial Development to the South and Southeast of the Proposed Project Area
(Google Earth 2023).
4.11

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
5.0 PROPERTY TYPES
The architectural resources surveyed during the current project comprise mainly residential structures and
agricultural outbuildings also documented. The residential resources reflect the mid -to late nineteenth
agricultural landscape of Catawba County and the early to mid -twentieth century expansion of the area
around Maiden and include vernacular farmhouses, front gable bungalows, Minimal Traditional- and
Ranch -style, and Split -Level dwellings with varying degrees of architectural integrity.
5.1.1 Nineteenth Century Residential Architecture Types
Dwelling associated with early to mid -nineteenth century farms were often two-story, three -bay, side
gable, frame residences. Common to this house type, were exterior end chimneys and one-story front
porch. Though these dwellings were often vernacular in appearance, modest Federal and Greek Revival
embellishments were often added. CT1830 falls within this house type. In the time after the Civil War, (-
Houses became a popular house type in rural Catawba County. Weatherboards were the most common
sheathing material on houses constructed in the nineteenth century, both before and after the Civil War
(Kooiman 1989). The Parker House (CT0764), also part of a farm, was constructed during the closing
years of the nineteenth century or at the turn of the twentieth century and reflects the continued use of the
vernacular, two-story frame dwellings common to the nineteenth century.
5.1.1.1 Vernacular Farmhouses
Parker House and Farm (CT0764), 1670 W. Maiden Road
The Parker House and Farm was last surveyed in 1977 (NC HPO Site Files). The two-story, three -bay,
frame dwelling appears to be sided in aluminum and the side gable roof is clad in seamed metal. A one-
story, four -bay, hipped -roof porch with modern square post supports and railings extends across the
fagade. A two-story ell with one-story shed -roofed wings extends the house to the rear and two brick flues
project through the rear roof slope. The original windows have been replaced by one -over -one vinyl
sashes (Figure 6). The agricultural parcel also contains a vehicle shed, two barns, a well, shed, garage
(although within an area of woods and difficult to determine its exact function), grain silos, and what
appears to be the base of a tiled silo.
5.12

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 6 Parker House (CT0764), 1670 W. Maiden Road, View Looking Northeast.
Vernacular Farmhouse (CT1830), 1109 Zeb Haynes Road
The vernacular dwelling located on the larger farm parcel at 1109 Zeb Haynes Road was constructed
around 1880 and has been abandoned. The two-story, T-shaped dwelling features asbestos shingle
siding, a gable roof clad in metal, an exterior and interior brick chimney with corbeled caps. Several one-
story additions are visible on the aerial; however, only the one-story wing was visible from the public
ROW. The windows on the visible elevation appear to be six -over -six wood sashes (Figure 7). The
agricultural parcel also has the remains of several large barns and at least three mid -twentieth century
stave silos.
5.13

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 7 Vernacular Farmhouse (CT1830), 1109 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Southwest.
5.1.2 Twentieth Century Residential Architectural Styles
5.1.2.1 Front Gable Bungalows
The small scale of both Craftsman -style and front gable bungalows, as well as their affordability for the
growing middle class made this style of architecture popular during the early to mid -twentieth century
(Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission 2015). The type was also ideal as a style of
architecture that could be sited on the narrow lots of the rapidly expanding planned suburban areas of the
time period. Ubiquitous in the south, as well as other areas of the country, during this period were front
gable bungalows and was often less ornate than the Craftsman bungalows. Typically, these bungalows
featured front gables, instead of side gable roofs, interior brick flues, either projecting through the ridge
line or the roof slope, and hipped -roof front porches, which extended across the entire fagade. Unlike
Craftsman -style bungalows, front gable bungalows often lacked dormers. These bungalows also typically
featured rectangular plans with the front door opening up into the living space.
Front Gable Bungalow (CT1827), 1120 Zeb Haynes Road
The bungalow sits at an angle to the road and is common for the style. Constructed around 1930, the
one-story, frame dwelling is supported by a stone veneered foundation. The exterior is clad in aluminum
siding and the front gable roof in asphalt shingles. A one-story, two -bay, porch with turned wood posts is
located off the fagade and shelters the front entry. The house appears to have been extended to the north
and the entrance on the eastern elevation provides a secondary means of ingress into the dwelling. The
dwelling also features an interior brick flue and six -over -six wood sash windows (Figure 8). Secondary
resources on the property include a garage and two sheds.
5.14

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 8 Front Gable Bungalow (CT1827), 1120 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Northwest.
5.1.2.2 Minimal Traditional
Minimal Traditional dwellings, popular between c. 1935 and 1950, were a response to the Depression
era. The houses were simplified from the early Craftsman style bungalows and mid -twentieth century
Tudor Revival style. The dwellings featured no or extremely limited ornamentation. Other characteristics
included narrow or no eaves. Less steep roof lines, as compared to the Tudor Revival style, were also
common (McAlester and McAlester 1993:478).
Minimal Traditional House (CT1826), 3335 US 321
The Minimal Traditional House located at 3335 US 321 was constructed in 1948. The one-story, three -
bay dwelling features brick veneer exterior walls and a side gable roof clad in seamed metal. A number of
additions are present and include a one-story, gable -roofed wing and gable -roofed ell. The ell has been
extended by a gable -roofed addition which connects to a framed carport. The dwelling also features an
exterior brick chimney off the fagade, a single -bay, gable -roofed porch with cast metal supports, and one -
over -one vinyl replacement sash windows (Figure 9). Also present on the lot are a garage, carport, and
two sheds.
5.15

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 9 Minimal Traditional Dwelling (CT1826), 3335 US 321, View Looking Southwest.
Minimal Traditional House (CT1829). 1370 Zeb Haynes Road
The second Minimal Traditional House, located at 1370 Zeb Haynes Road, was constructed in 1950. The
one-story dwelling is supported by a stone foundation with its exterior walls sided in vinyl. The cross -
gable roof is sheathed in asphalt shingles and an exterior brick chimney is located off the southwest gable
end. A gable -roofed porch wing extends from the northeast gable end and a combination shed- and
gable -roofed porch with turned wood posts is located off the southern corner of the house. The original
windows of the house have been replaced by one -over -one vinyl sashes (Figure 10). A vehicle shed and
workshop are also located on the property.
5.16

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 10 Minimal Traditional Dwelling (CT1829), 1370 Zeb Haynes Road, View Looking
Northwest.
5.1.2.3 Ranch -Style
The Ranch -style, the popularity of which is evident in the many planned developments of the 1950s and
1960s, originated in 1930s California. The style became dominant in the 1940s with the increased
dependence on the automobile. Prior to the 1940s, many urban and suburban dwellers resided in
compact houses on small lots and walked to the streetcar lines. The increasing popularity of the
automobile allowed people to move further out from the city and indulge in more expansive lots. The
Ranch house's design allowed a lateral expansion of dwellings, emphasizing the fagade, and could fit on
larger residential lots with more open space between houses (McAlester and McAlester 1993:479). A
majority of the Ranch -style dwellings surveyed were constructed within a planned late 1950s
neighborhood during a time of residential, non-agricultural expansion within Catawba County in the mid -to
late twentieth century.
Ranch -Inspired House (CT1818), 1106 Springdale Drive
The house located at 1106 Springdale Drive, while not strictly a Ranch but designed with both
Contemporary and Ranch -style influences, is a one-story, three -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior
and front gable roof clad in asphalt shingles. Wood shingles sheath the front gable end. The house has
been extended to the side by a shed -roofed wing with stone veneer exterior and a large brick chimney,
characteristic of the Ranch style. The configuration of the house with the wing incorporates a Contempory
influence. A single -bay, gable -roofed porch with turned wood supports shelters the front entry. The
dwelling also features a modern entry door and one -over -one sash windows and a Chicago -style window,
typical of the Ranch -style, which are flanked by louvered shutters on the fagade (Figure 11). Four small
sheds are also located on the property.
5.17

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 11 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1818), 1106 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Northeast.
Ranch -Style House (CT1819), 1098 Springdale Drive
The Ranch -style house, constructed in 1958, is a one-story, four -bay dwelling supported by a brick
foundation and sided in vinyl with the side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles. The house has been
extended to the rear by a shed -roofed ell. A two -bay, shed -roofed porch with metal supports shelters the
front entry and a concrete block flue is located off the south gable end. The vinyl sash windows are
flanked by decorative raised panel shutters (Figure 12). A garage, two carports, and two sheds are also
located on the property.
Ranch -Style House (CT1820), 1088 Springdale Drive
The Ranch -style house is a one-story, four -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior and side gable roof
clad in asphalt shingles. The vinyl -clad fifth bay appears to have at one time been an engaged carport
which now contains a modern, single -leaf entry door. A single -bay, gable -roofed porch with vinyl -clad
supports shelters. A casement window has been added to the south gable end and the original windows
have been replaced by six -over -six vinyl sashes (Figure 13). A modern garage is also present on the
property.
5.18

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
r
i
�1
F
Figure 12 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1819), 1098 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest.
Figure 13 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1820), 1088 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest.
5.19

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Ranch -Style House (CT1821), 1073 Springdale Drive
The Ranch house represents the basic form of the style and is a one-story, four -bay dwelling with brick
veneer exterior and side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles. The house has been extended to the south
by a hipped roof wing with a shed -roofed carport addition off the fagade. The carport roof is supported by
metal poles. The house also features a vinyl clad cornice, modern entry door, and one -over -one vinyl
sash and vinyl sliding windows (Figure 14). A modern shed is also located on the property.
Figure 14 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1821), 1073 Springdale Drive, View Looking West.
Ranch -Style House (CT1822), 1068 Springdale Drive
The Ranch -style house is a one-story, five -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior and side gable roof
clad in asphalt shingles. The house features an engaged carport, which is partially enclosed in the rear,
and small rear, shed -roofed porch. The enclosed portion of the north gable end is clad in vinyl. The house
appears to have been altered and an infilled section of brick on the fagade suggests the presence of a
door, a window has been enclosed on the south gable end and a shadow, also on the south gable end
suggests the presence of a gable -roofed wing. The dwelling also features replacement one -over -one vinyl
sash windows (Figure 15). A large garage is also present on the property behind the house.
5.20

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 15 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1822), 1068 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest.
Ranch -Style House (CT1823), 1058 Springdale Drive
The Ranch -style house, constructed in 1959, is a one-story, four -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior
and side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles. The house has been extended to the north by a garage
addition which is clad in vinyl and features a single garage bay. A once exterior brick chimney has been
incorporated into the garage addition. A deck has been added to the fagade and provides access to the
modern front entry door. The original windows have been replaced by six -over -six vinyl sashes (Figure
16). A modern shed is also located on the property.
5.21

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 16 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1823), 1058 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Northwest.
Ranch -Style House (CT1824), 1050 Springdale Drive
The Ranch -style house, constructed in 1959, is a one-story, four -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior
and side gable roof clad in metal. The house has been extended to the south by a wing which is clad in
vinyl. A brick flue projects through the ridge line of the roof. A single -bay, gable -roofed porch with turned
wood posts shelters the front entry. The dwelling retains its original two -over -two horizontally divided
wood sash windows and also features a bank of six windows that appear to be a combination of fixed and
awning wood windows (Figure 17). A modern shed is also located on the property.
5.22

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 17 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1824), 1050 Springdale Drive, View Looking
Southwest.
Ranch-Stvle House (CT1828). 3108 Rome Jones Road
The Ranch -style house located at 3108 Rome Jones Road is not part of a planned neighborhood. The
dwelling, constructed in 1967, is an example of the later, expansive form of Ranch house. The one-story,
five -bay dwelling with brick veneer exterior and side gable roof clad in asphalt shingles, features
symmetrical wings. A large brick chimney projects through the rear roof slope and a one-story, three -bay,
gable -roofed porch is centered on the facade. The porch features vinyl siding in the gable and is
supported by vinyl columns. The original two -over -two horizontally divided wood sash windows are extant
and are flanked by louvered shutters while the front entry features a Colonial Revival surround (Figure
18). Several late twentieth century vehicle sheds and a contemporary garage are also located on the
property.
5.23

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 18 Ranch -Style Dwelling (CT1828), 3108 Rome Jones Road, View Looking
Northwest.
5.1.2.4 Split -Level
The Split -Level house, often referred to as a raised Ranch house, was a popular dwelling type in the
1950s and 1960s. The house was designed to separate living areas into social spaces, such as living
rooms, kitchens, and dining rooms from private or quiet spaces such as bedrooms. Typically, this building
type had split stairs just inside the front entry and provided access to both the lower and upper floors.
Often a garage was incorporated into the bottom level of the dwelling. The exterior configuration varied
widely and utilized numerous sheathing materials, roof lines, and window configurations Often the
designs were reflective of the Ranch -style with wide overhanging eaves and Colonial Revival architectural
elements, and similar to some Ranch houses, featured brick veneer on the lower level with aluminum or
wood siding on the upper level. Other characteristics of the Split -Level dwelling included asymmetrical
facades and large picture windows (Pennsylvania Historical & Museum Commission 2015).
Split -Level House (CT1825), 1044 Springdale Drive
The split-level dwelling located within the planned neighborhood was constructed in 1960 and is a
common configuration for its type. The house is supported by a brick -clad foundation and the exterior
walls are sided in board -and -batten with the roof clad in asphalt shingles. The house also features an
interior brick chimney and a screened -in porch. The fenestration of the dwelling has been altered and
includes modern entry doors, modern retractable garage bay door, and nine -light vinyl casement or
sliding windows (Figure 19). A modern shed is also located on the property in the enclosed rear yard.
5.24

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPERTY TYPES
Figure 19 Split -Level Dwelling (CT1825), 1044 Springdale Drive, View Looking West.
5.25

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
On November 29, 2022, Stantec conducted a Phase I architectural resources survey for the Maidens Site
(CLT10; the Project), a proposed data center in Catawba County, North Carolina. The survey included the
approximately 292-acre Project Area and resources on adjacent parcels or within view of the proposed
Study Area. The Project is located approximately 1.25 miles northwest of the town of Maiden, and as
currently designed, will be comprised of five data center buildings, each with five colos and one
administrative building with a total capacity of 240MW. The Project Area terrain consists of woodland,
previously logged areas, and overgrown brush. The Project Area is bounded to the south by West Maiden
Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and
to the north by a transmission line corridor and private parcels. The work was conducted at the request of
Microsoft Corporation.
Thirteen new individual resources, based on tax parcel data and the field survey, and one previously
recorded resource, according to research conducted on the NC HPO's HPOWEB database, were located
within the Study Area of the proposed project (Table 1). The surveyed resources were all dwellings with
two of the residences located on agricultural parcels.
The individual recorded resources, based on the current survey, are generally reflective of the mid -
nineteenth to mid -to late twentieth century development of Catawba County and lack direct and/or
important associations under Criterion A, B, or C for historical significance necessary for listing on the
NRHP. As such, it is recommended that the resources are not individually eligible for listing on the NRHP
(Table 1). Criterion D, typically associated with archaeological sites, was not considered in evaluating the
architectural resources documented during the survey.
Criterion A: The resources, under NRHP Criterion A do not individually express any distinctive themes
relating to the development of Catawba County and do not contribute significantly to the county's growth.
It is recommended therefore that the resources do not meet the criteria necessary for individual listing on
the NRHP under Criterion A as the properties were constructed in response to the general development
of the area. Additionally, the agricultural association of the machine/maintenance shop has been lost due
to the demolition of the other farm buildings and dwelling on the property.
Criterion B: The resources surveyed do not appear to be associated with any known individuals who
made significant contributions to the historical development of Catawba County. Although limited
information about the owners of the properties is known, it does not appear that they would be considered
of transcendent importance to the Nation's history and therefore the resources do not meet the criteria
necessary for listing on the NRHP under Criterion B.
Criterion C: The resources do not appear to have significant architectural integrity for listing on the
NRHP under Criterion C and are of common building types. In addition, the resource is utilitarian in
design and does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction nor
does the building represent the work of a master. Additionally, the previously recorded Rhoney House
6.26

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
has been altered by the replacement of some of its original windows with vinyl sashes. It is therefore
recommended that the resources surveyed do not meet the criteria necessary for listing on the NRHP
under Criterion C.
No further architectural survey work is recommended as part of the CLT10 project.
Table 1. NRHP Recommendations for Architectural Resources Surveyed within the
Survey Area
HPO #
Resource Name/Address
Date
Tax Parcel ID
NRHP Recommendation
as a Result of the Survey
CT0764
Parker House and Farm, 1670
1900
363710467856
Recommended Not Eligible
W. Maiden Road
c.
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1818
House, 1106 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090143
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1819
House, 1098 Springdale Drive
1958/1987
364705090241
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1820
House, 1088 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090331
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1821
House, 1073 Springdale Drive
1963/1993
364705090431
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1822
House, 1068 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090521
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1823
House, 1058 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090631
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1824
House, 1050 Springdale Drive
1959
364705090750
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1825
House, 1044 Springdale Drive
1960
364705090883
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1826
House, 3335 US 321
1948
364817003061
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1827
House, 1120 Zeb Haynes Road
c. 1930
363708993172
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1828
House, 3108 Rome Jones Road
1967
363819514781
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1829
House, 1370 Zeb Haynes Road
1950
363711669790
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listing on the NRHP
CT1830
Farm, 1109 Zeb Haynes Road
1880
363708987536
Recommended Not Eligible
for Listina on the NRHP
6.27

7.0 REFERENCES
Advisory Council for Historic Preservation (ACHP)
2000 36 CFR 800: Part 800- Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties. Federal Register,
December 12, Washington, D.C.
Bayley, Elizabeth
2006 "Catawba County" in Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell, available at:
https://www.ncpedia.org/geography/catawba, accessed 17 February 2023.
Catawba College
2021 "History of Catawba College," available at: https://catawba.edu/coIIegehistory/, accessed 17
February 2023.
2022 Catawba County Online Tax Assessment Records. https://gis.catawbacountync.gov/parcel/,
accessed November 2022.
Catawba County Registry of Deeds.
https://www.catawbarod.org/DocumentView.asp?ReturnTo=BookAndPage.asp, accessed 4 January
2023.
Catawba County Government
2020a "About Catawba County," available at: https://www.catawbacountync.gov/county-
government/about-catawba-count //, accessed 17 February 2023.
Cloues, Richard
2010 Ranch Houses in Georgia: A Guide to House Types (Sub -Types). Available at:
https://gadnr.org/sites/default/files/hpd/pdf/RanchHousesinGeorgiaTwo.pdf, Accessed 7 February
2022.
Corbitt, David Leroy
1987 The formation of the North Carolina counties, 1663-1943, available at:
https://digital.ncdcr.gov/digital/collection/pl6062coII9/id/290103, accessed 17 February 2023.
Hahn, George W.
1911 The Catawba Soldier of the Civil War, available at:
https://www.carolana.com/NC/Counties/The Catawba Soldier of the Civil War G W Hahn 19
11.pdf, accessed 17 February 2023.

Kooiman, Barbara M.
1989 "Historic and Architectural Resources of Catawba County, North Carolina" National Register of
Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, available at:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdcr/nr/CT1299.pdf, accessed 2 March 2023.
McAlester, Virginia and Lee McAlester
1993 A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
North Carolina Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
2019 Report Standards for Historic Structure Survey Reports/Determination of Eligibility/Section
1061110 Compliance Reports in North Carolina.
2022 HPO Site Files
Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission
2015 "Bungalow/Craftsman Style 1900 — 1930." Available at:
http://www.phmc.state.Pa.us/portal/communities/architecture/styles/bungalow.htmI Accessed 2
March 2023.
2015 "Split -Level." Available at: http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/portal/communities/pa-suburbs/field
guide/split-level.html, Accessed 10 March 2023.
Preslar, Charles J., Jr.
1954 A History of Catawba County. Catawba County Historical Association, Inc., Newton, North
Carolina.
United States Census Bureau
1950 "Number of Inhabitants: North Carolina," available at:
https://www2.census.gov/1ibrary/publications/decennial/l 950/population-volume-
2/06586136v2p33chl .pdf, accessed 21 February 2023.
United States Department of the Interior (USDI)
1981 Department of the Interior's Regulations, 36 CFR Part 60: National Register of Historic Places.
1983 Department of the Interior, Archaeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and Guidelines. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
2002 "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation." National Register Bulletin 15. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Interagency Resources Division, Washington D.C.
United States Federal Census 1860, 1900, and 1930.
United States Federal Census Non -Population Slave Census 1860.
Yoder, R. A.
1886 Map of Catawba County, North Carolina. Library of Congress Geography and Map Division,
available at: https://www.loc.gov/item/2001620490/, accessed 17 February 2023.

APPENDIX

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix A ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY MAPPING
Appendix A ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY MAPPING

s ^g�
a R3 oLL
ry c W
V1 rn Ery c8 _
U Sy c
K 9� E e
E C
Q Q y og 4J
"Lo oil
z a Z jQU 9� 2 �qeE
L
• ''NH al
r'
N N
U U o
N
� N
U
m o
_ F
`:U U �• y
y �
_ N
C
2 • ter.. s: - 3'
I
• ® U
� I N
■
1 r ♦ � m
- 1 • I 1
■
- - 1 �� ice, •
♦I ♦
ttE'3' _ - �•� �:
�9 ,r
5 r -
P�S
y + T
RS�+ir
•Try �!k• fi'�:: �- -
.tl
yy F
_ 2

A PHASE I ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPROXIMATELY 292-ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS DATA CENTER (CLT10) IN CATAWBA
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix B KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES
Appendix B KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES
m B.2

Sandra DeChard
Senior Architectural Historian
Ms. Sandra DeChard is an architectural historian with over 25 years of cultural resources experience working
in the Mid -Atlantic, South, Mid -West, New England, and Northwest regions. Her experience includes large -
and small-scale architectural Phase I level surveys for transmission line corridors, transportation
infrastructure, solar and wind projects, and visual effects evaluations, Phase II level surveys, stabilization
plans, historic structures reports, cost share projects, and National Register of Historic Places nominations in
consultation with state historic preservation offices and local, state, and federal agencies. Her experience also
extends to detailed historical research and archival review, scaled architectural drawings, signage and
heritage tourism brochures, as well as museum displays. Additionally, Sandra was a founding member and
Chairperson of the Martinsville, Virginia Architectural Review Board and has lectured on various Art, Art
History, and Architectural topics as educator in humanities and as a guest speaker. Sandra's current
responsibilities at Stantec include architectural surveys at the Phase I and II levels, managerial tasks
associated with architectural investigations, writing and editing technical reports, consultation with and
representation of clients before state and national review agencies, and developing and managing project
budgets and scopes of work.
EDUCATION
Advanced Diploma in Local History, Oxford
University, Oxford, England 2022
Certificate of Higher Education in History, Oxford
University, Oxford, England 2020
M.A. Preservation Studies, Architectural History,
Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, 2000
B.S. Interior Design, University of Delaware,
Newark, Delaware, 1989
CERTIFICATIONS & TRAINING
Section 106 Certification, Richmond, Virginia,
2014
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Bridges
VDOT — Page County Bridge National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form*, Page County,
Virginia
Ms. DeChard conducted detailed research and
authored the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) nomination form for the Page County
Bridge, Page County, Virginia.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
Transmission
A Phase I Architectural Survey of Approximately 4
Miles Associated with the Proposed Line 239
Lakeview-Hornertown 230kV Rebuild Project in
Halifax County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project which included a Phase I
survey of 82 resources within the area of potential
effect for the proposed transmission line rebuild.
UC Synergetic — Archaeological Identification
Survey of Approximately 32.82 Hectares (81.12
Acres) and Architectural Windshield Survey
Associated with the Western Carolinas
Modernization Project, Asheville, Buncombe
County, North Carolina
Sandra served as Architectural Historian for the
project which included a windshield survey of 161
resources within a 1.5-mile area of potential effect.

Sandra DeChard
Senior Architectural Historian
Roadways
NCDOT — Historic Structures Survey Report
Interchange Improvements SR 2500 (Blue Ridge
Road) from US 70 to South of 1-40 and South of I-
40 to SR 2713 (Old Lake Gap Road),
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian. The project included an intensive level
survey of two resources for the purposes of
evaluating the resources' NRHP eligibility.
NCDOT — Building Inventory for TIP# U-5863,
Widen NC 133 (Castle Hayne Road) from I-
140/US17 (Wilmington Bypass) to SR 1310
(Division Drive), New Hanover County, North
Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project which included a building
inventory of 136 resources within the area of
potential effect for the proposed road
improvements.
NCDOT — Historic Structure Survey for TIP# R-
5743B, Widen US 23/US441 from US 64 to SR
1652 (Wide Horizon Drive)/SR1152 (Belden
Circle) to South of SR1649 (Prentiss Bridge
Road), Franklin, Macon County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project, which included an
intensive level survey of five resources within the
area of potential effect for the proposed road
improvements. The project's intent NRHP eligibility
for each of the resources surveyed.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
Railroads
NCDOT — Historic Structures Survey Report for
T.I.P. No. Z-5700, Crossing No. 629724M, North
Church Street, Four Oaks, Johnston County, North
Carolina.
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the project which included an intensive level
survey of an individual resource and a re-
evaluation of NRHP status of an historic district
within the area of potential effect for the proposed
rail crossing improvement. The evaluation also
included a consideration of inclusion of the
individual resource to the National Register listed
district as well as a National Register eligibility
evaluation for the individual resource surveyed.
Defense/Military
United States Army Reserve — Army Reserves
Centers in North Carolina: A Brief History
Sandra DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project. The project was part of an
MOA for the Thomas B. Smothers Army Reserve
Center. The Administration Building and OMS
were determined eligible for listing on the NRHP
by the NC SHPO. It was also determined that the
disposal of the property out of Government
ownership constituted an undertaking pursuant to
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and that the disposal would result in an
adverse effect to historic properties. To mitigate
the adverse effect the MOA required the
documentation of the Thomas B. Smothers ARC in
the form of an historic narrative to include a history
of the Thomas B. Smothers ARC and a general
history of ARCs in North Carolina.

® Stantec
A Phase I Archaeological Survey
of an Approximately 118.17-
Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed
Maidens Site (CLT10) in Catawba
County, North Carolina
March 17, 2023
Prepared for:
Microsoft
Attn: Lexi Jones
[phone]
Prepared by:
Donald Sadler, Project Archaeologist
Sandra DeChard, Senior Architectural
Historian
and
Brynn Stewart, Senior Principal
Investigator
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
5209 Center Street
Williamsburg, VA 22188
[phone]

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
The conclusions in the Report are Stantec's professional opinion, as of the time of the Report, and concerning
the scope described in the Report. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information
existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. The
Report relates solely to the specific project for which Stantec was retained and the stated purpose for which
the Report was prepared. The Report is not to be used or relied on for any variation or extension of the
project, or for any other project or purpose, and any unauthorized use or reliance is at the recipient's own risk.
Stantec has assumed all information received from the Client and third parties in the preparation of the Report
to be correct. While Stantec has exercised a customary level of judgment or due diligence in the use of such
information, Stantec assumes no responsibility for the consequences of any error or omission contained
therein.
This Report is intended solely for use by the Client in accordance with Stantec's contract with the Client.
While the Report may be provided to applicable authorities having jurisdiction and others for whom the Client
is responsible, Stantec does not warrant the services to any third party. The report may not be relied upon by
any other party without the express written consent of Stantec, which may be withheld at Stantec's discretion.
Prepared by
Donald Sadler, MA, Project Archaeologist
Prepared by
Sandra DeChard, Senior Architectural Historian
Reviewed by
Brynn Stewart, MA, Senior Principal Investigator
Approved by
Loretta Cummings, PhD, Principal

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1.1
2.0 PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT.........................................................2.1
2.1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................2.1
2.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY.................................................................................2.1
2.3 HYDROLOGY..............................................................................................................2.1
2.4 SOIL MORPHOLOGY..................................................................................................2.1
2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES.............................................................................................2.3
3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT................................................................................................3.1
3.1 PRE -CONTACT NATIVE AMERICAN CONTEXT........................................................3.1
3.1.1 Pre -Clovis (?-13,000 BC)...........................................................................3.1
3.1.2 Paleoindian Period (PRIOR TO 9500 BC)...................................................3.1
3.1.3 Archaic Period (8000-4000 BC)..................................................................3.2
3.1.4 Woodland Period (4000-400 BP)................................................................3.3
3.2 HISTORIC CONTEXT..................................................................................................3.4
4.0 HISTORIC MAP REVIEW............................................................................................4.1
5.0 RESEARCH DESIGN...................................................................................................5.1
5.1 OBJECTIVES...............................................................................................................5.1
5.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS....................................................................................5.1
5.2.1 Archaeological Sites....................................................................................5.1
5.2.2 Architectural Resources..............................................................................5.2
6.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................6.1
6.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY.....................................................................................6.1
6.1.1 Shovel Testing............................................................................................6.1
6.1.2 Laboratory Methods....................................................................................6.2
6.1.3 Definitions...................................................................................................6.2
6.1.4 Expected Results — Archaeological Site Identification.................................6.2
6.2 REPORT PREPARATION............................................................................................6.3
7.0
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS..................................................................7.1
7.1
INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................7.1
7.2
AREA A........................................................................................................................7.1
7.3
AREA B........................................................................................................................7.4
7.4
AREA C........................................................................................................................7.6
7.5
AREA D........................................................................................................................7.8
7.6
AREA E......................................................................................................................7.10
7.7
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESULTS.................................................................................7.12
7.7.1 Newly Recorded Archaeological Sites.......................................................7.12
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................8.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
9.0 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................9.1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Soils in the Project Area..............................................................................................2.3
Table 2 Summary of Observations for Historic Maps................................................................4.1
Table 3 Summary of Observations for USGS Topographic Maps.............................................4.1
Table 4 Previously Identified Archaeological Sites within a 1-Mile Radius of the Project
Area...........................................................................................................................5.2
Table 5 Previously Identified Architectural Resources Within a 1-Mile Radius of the
ProjectArea...............................................................................................................5.2
Table 6 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area A...................................................7.1
Table 7 STP D3 Soil Profile in Area A......................................................................................7.4
Table 8 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area B...................................................7.4
Table 9 STP C10 Soil Profile in Area B....................................................................................7.4
Table 10 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area C.................................................7.6
Table 11 STP M3 Soil Profile in Area C...................................................................................7.6
Table 12 STP E4 Soil Profile in Area D....................................................................................7.8
Table 13 STP JU8 Soil Profile in Area E................................................................................7.10
Table 14 STP A2 Soil Profile in Site 31 CT294.......................................................................7.12
Table 15 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT294..................................................................7.15
Table 16 STP E5 Soil Profile in Site 31 CT295.......................................................................7.18
Table 17 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT295..................................................................7.21
Table 18 STP JU5 Soil Profile in Site 31 CT296......................................................................7.26
Table 19 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT296..................................................................7.29
Table 20 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT297..................................................................7.32
Table 21 STP FF3 Soil Profile in Site 31 CT298......................................................................7.36
Table 22 Recommendations for Archaeological Resources within the Project Area .................8.2
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location Map.................................................................................................1.2
Figure2 Soils Map...................................................................................................................2.2
Figure 3 Detail of A new map of North & South Carolina, & Georgia Depicting the Project
Area Vicinity (Kitchin 1765; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division) .........
4.2
Figure 4 Detail of Carolina septentrionale et meridionale en 4 feuilles, traduite de
I'Anglois Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (Le Rouge et al. 1777; Library of
Congress Geography and Map Division)...................................................................4.3
Figure 5 Detail of North Carolina Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (Carey 1814; Library
of Congress Geography and Map Division)................................................................4.4
Figure 6 Detail of A new map of the state of North Carolina: constructed from actual
surveys, authentic public documents and private contributions Depicting the
Project Area Vicinity (Williams 1854; Library of Congress Geography and Map
Division).....................................................................................................................4.5
Figure 7 Detail of Map of Catawba County, North Carolina Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division)..................4.6
Figure 8 Detail of Reconnaissance erosion survey of the State of North Carolina
Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (United States Soil Conservation Service
1934; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division...........................................4.7

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Figure 9 Detail of 1895 Hickory, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area Vicinity
(USGS 1895; http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/, Accessed 2022)......................4.8
Figure 10 Detail of 1954 Charlotte, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (USGS 1954; http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/, Accessed 2022)..........4.9
Figure 11 Previously Identified Archaeological Resources within a 1.6-Kilometer (1-Mile)
Radius of the Project Area.........................................................................................5.3
Figure 12 Previously Identified Architectural Resources within a 1.6-Kilometer (1-Mile)
Radius of the Project Area.........................................................................................5.4
Figure 13 Archaeological Base Mapping..................................................................................7.2
Figure 14 General Conditions of Open Fields within Area A; View to the South.......................7.3
Figure 15 General Woodland Conditions within Area A; View to the West...............................7.3
Figure 16 General Conditions in Northern Portion of Area B; View to the East .........................7.5
Figure 17 Woodland Conditions within Area B; View to the West.............................................7.5
Figure 18 General Conditions in Eastern Portion of Area C; View to the West .........................7.7
Figure 19 Woodland Conditions in Western Portion of Area C; View to the East......................7.7
Figure 20 Woodland Conditions in Northern Portion of Area D; View to the South...................7.9
Figure 21 Open Grasslands in Central Portion of Area D; View to the South ...........................7.9
Figure 22 General Conditions in Eastern Portion of Area E; View to the East ........................7.11
Figure 23 Disturbed Ground Conditions within Area E; View to the South..............................7.11
Figure 24 Base Map of Archaeological Investigations within Sites 31 CT294 and
31 CT295..................................................................................................................7.13
Figure 25 General View of Site 31 CT294 within Area D; View to the North............................7.14
Figure 26 Architectural Debris Pile Site 31 CT294; View to the Northwest..............................7.14
Figure 27 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31 CT294. A: Amber Beer
Bottle Glass Fragment; B: Possible Edgefield Pottery American Stoneware
Sherds; C: Flashed Pink Frosted Glassware Fragment; D: Uranium Glass
Fragment; E: Colorless ABM Bottle Glass Fragment; and F: Ironstone Rim
Sherd.......................................................................................................................7.16
Figure 28 Detail of the 1970 Maiden, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area
and Site 31 CT294 (USGS 1970; USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer
(arcgis.com), Accessed 2023)..................................................................................7.17
Figure 29 General View of Site 31 CT295 within Area D; View to the Southeast .....................7.19
Figure 30 Structural Debris within Push Pile at Site 31 CT295; View to the West....................7.19
Figure 31 Disturbed Ground Surface in Location of Former Outbuilding at Site 31 CT295
with Hunting Blind in Trees at Back Left; View to the South.....................................7.20
Figure 32 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31 CT295. A: Iron Strapping
Fragment; B: Window Glass Fragment; C: Milk Glass Lid Liner Fragment; D:
Possible Edgefield Pottery Stoneware Sherd; E: Ironstone Sherd with Molded
Basketweave and Rope Motifs; F: Pharmaceutical Vial/Bottle Fragment; G:
Lead Object; H: Aqua Bottle Glass Fragment; I: Amber Bottle Glass Fragment;
J: American Stoneware Sherd; K: Creamware Rim Sherd; L: Ironstone Rim
Sherd; and M: Sponged Whiteware Sherd...............................................................7.23
Figure 33 Outbuilding in Location of Site 31 CT295 with Site 31 CT294 to Northeast
(Google Earth 2010; Accessed 2023)......................................................................7.25
Figure 34 Base Map of Archaeological Investigations within Sites 31 CT296 and
31 CT297..................................................................................................................7.27
Figure 35 General View of Site 31 CT296 within Area E; View to the West.............................7.28
iii

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Figure 36 Machine Made Brick and Mortar Observed on the Ground Surface at Site
31 CT296; View to the North.....................................................................................7.28
Figure 37 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31 CT296. A: Albany Slip
American Stoneware Crock Lid Sherd; B: Possible Aqua Canning Jar
Fragment; C: Milk Glass Cold Cream Jar Fragment; D: Transferprinted
Ironstone Rim Sherd; E: Mason Jar Fragment; F: Ironstone Sherd; G:
Whiteware Sherds; and H: Ironstone Base Sherd with Partial Makers Mark ............
7.30
Figure 38 General View of Site 31 CT297 within Area E; View to the North............................7.32
Figure 39 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31 CT297. A: Possible
Edgefield Pottery American Stoneware Sherds; B: Colorless Soda Lime Bottle
Glass; C: Ironstone Sherd; D: Milk Glass Lid Liner Fragments; and E: Shell
Edge Ironstone Rim Sherd.......................................................................................7.33
Figure 40 Base Map of Archaeological Investigations within Site 31CT298............................7.35
Figure 41 General View of Site 31 CT298 within Area B; View to the East..............................7.36
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A ARTIFACT INVENTORY...........................................................................A.1
APPENDIX B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORMS.......................................................... B.1
APPENDIX C KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES..................................................................CA
iv

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Executive Summary
From November 28 to December 7, of 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) conducted a
Phase I archaeological survey of approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) associated with the
proposed Maidens Site (CLT10) in Catawba County, North Carolina. The Project, as currently designed,
will comprise five (5) datacenter buildings, each with five (5) colos and one (1) administrative building with
a total capacity of 240MW. Located approximately 2.01 kilometers (1.25 miles) northwest of the town of
Maiden, the Project Area was defined as the entire approximately 118.17-hectare (292-acre) parcel and
includes woodland, previously logged areas, and brush. The Project Area is bounded to the south by
West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and
Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor and private parcels. The work was
conducted at the request of Microsoft (Client).
The Phase I survey was designed to locate and identify cultural resources within the defined Project Area
and to obtain sufficient information to make recommendations regarding their potential eligibility for listing
in the NRHP. The overall Project Area encompassed approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) in
extent.
Phase I survey included pedestrian survey of the entire Project Area conducted concurrently with
systematic subsurface testing. A total of 732 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals
along transects spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart throughout the Project Area. Five shovel tests were
positive for cultural material. A total of 15 radial shovel tests were excavated at 15-meter (49.2-foot)
intervals to determine the bounds of newly recorded cultural resources. Six radial shovel tests positive for
additional cultural material. Twenty-five shovel tests were not excavated within otherwise testable areas
due primarily to the presence of slope, standing water, ditches, roads, and a sewer line. Those portions of
the Project Area exhibiting greater than 15 percent slope or evidence of significant logging -related ground
disturbance were not subject to systematic shovel testing. These areas were subjected to pedestrian
survey where possible.
Five new archaeological sites were identified during this investigation. Four sites (31CT294 through
31 CT297) are artifact scatters ranging in date from the mid- to late nineteenth to mid -twentieth century.
Site 31CT294 is in the location of a former house while Site 31CT295, a short distance to the southwest,
is in the location of a former outbuilding. These structures, both of which have been demolished, may
have been part of the same larger farmstead. Both sites also exhibit disturbance associated with
demolition of the structures/clearing of the land. Site 31CT296 is a surface scatter dating to the early
twentieth century and Site 31 CT297 is a mid- to late nineteenth surface scatter. Both of these sites are
located in recently logged areas and exhibit significant ground disturbance. Finally, Site 31CT298
comprises a single whiteware sherd representing an isolated find from the nineteenth to twentieth
century. All of the sites identified within the Project Area exhibited ground disturbance. These resources
lacked depth and integrity and appeared to retain little research potential. As such, Stantec
recommends Sites 31CT294, 31CT295, 31CT296, 31CT297, and 31CT298 as not eligible for listing
on the NRHP under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the
v

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
evaluation of these resources. No further archaeological work is recommended for the Project
Area.
Recommendations for Archaeological Resources within the Project Area
Resource
Resource Type
Association
Stantec Recommendation
31 CT294
Artifact Scatter
201h C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT295
Artifact Scatter
Late 19th to Mid-20th c.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT296
Artifact Scatter
Early 20th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT297
Artifact Scatter
Mid- to Late 19th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT298
Isolated Find
19th to 20th c.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
M
Vi

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Abbreviations
amsl
above mean sea level
DEQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
GIS
Geographic Information System
GPS
Global Positioning System
NCDNCR
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
NC HPO
North Carolina Historic Preservation Office
n.d.
no date
NHL
National Historic Landmark
NHPA
National Historic Preservation Act
NRHP
National Register of Historic Places
OSA
North Carolina Office of State Archaeology
ROW
Right of Way
Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
STP
Shovel Test Pit
USDI
United States Department of the Interior
USGS
United States Geological Survey
Vii

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
From November 28 to December 7, of 2022, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) conducted a
Phase I archaeological survey of approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) associated with the
proposed Maidens Site (CLT10) in Catawba County, North Carolina. The Project, as currently designed,
will comprise five (5) datacenter buildings, each with five (5) colos and one (1) administrative building with
a total capacity of 240MW. Located approximately 2.01 kilometers (1.25 miles) northwest of the town of
Maiden, the Project Area was defined as the entire approximately 118.17-hectare (292-acre) parcel and
includes woodland, previously logged areas, and brush. The Project Area is bounded to the south by
West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and
Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor and private parcels (Figure 1). The work
was conducted at the request of Microsoft (Client).
The cultural resources survey was conducted pursuant to the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology
Archaeological Investigation Standards and Guidelines for Background Research, Field Methodologies,
Technical Reports, and Curation (North Carolina Office of State Archaeology [OSA] 2017a). Stantec
designed the survey to identify archaeological resources that may be present in the Project Area and to
obtain sufficient information to make recommendations based on their potential eligibility for listing on the
NRHP. To accomplish this, both documentary research and cultural resources survey were conducted in
compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA-PL89-665), as amended, the
Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, Executive Order 11593, relevant sections of 36 CFR
60 and 36 CFR 800, and with reference to state and federal (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation [United States Department of the Interior (USDI)
1983]) guidelines for conducting cultural resources investigations. Laboratory curation of cultural material
collected during the survey were made with regard to federal (36 CFR 79) and guidelines.
Senior Principal Investigator Brynn Stewart oversaw the project. Project Archaeologist Donald Sadler
authored the report with contributions by Senior Architectural Historian Sandra DeChard. Archaeological
Crew Chief Ashley Bocan directed the fieldwork and was assisted by Archaeological Technicians Kacie
Allen, Jonny Barkmeier, William Olson, Sam Sievers, and Jonathan Smith. Laboratory Manager Emily
Curme processed and analyzed all artifacts recovered during the investigation. GIS Technician Elise Ljiko
prepared the report graphics and project maps. Copies of all field notes, maps, correspondence, and
historical research materials are on file at Stantec's office in Richmond, Virginia.
1.1

L
_ 1 }'J.
t _
J 1y I
40
C--
1
9,
t
see oo �
we,
p.
i• r
age 'Ie.'i WT
0 1,000 2,000 N
i Project Area Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
Client/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Microsoft, NC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Project Location Map
Page 1.2
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
2.0 PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Project Area comprises woodland, previously logged areas, and overgrown brush. The Project Area
is bounded to the south by West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes
Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor and private
parcels.
2.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY
The Project Area lies within the Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina. The Piedmont
province lies across roughly 45 percent of the state of North Carolina and consists of rolling hills and low,
long ridges, along with a few low mountains, such as the Uwharrie and South Mountains. The Project
Area is situated on Paleozoic intrusive rocks, including granites, diabase, and quartz diorite. Elevation
within the Project Area ranges from 244 to 283 meters (799 to 928 feet) above mean sea level (amsl)
(North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality [DEQ] 2015; North Carolina Geological Survey
1985).
2.3 HYDROLOGY
The Project Area lies within the Catawba River Basin and is drained by Clark Creek, a tributary of the
South Fork of the Catawba River. The South Fork of the Catawba River, also called the South Fork River,
flows into the Catawba River, which merges into the Wateree River which is a tributary of the Santee
River. The Santee River flows into the Atlantic Ocean.
2.4 SOIL MORPHOLOGY
Soils in the Project Area primarily included loam and range from somewhat poorly and poorly drained to
moderately well-, well-, and excessively drained. The western edge, a narrow band along the center, and
the northwest edge of the Project Area contain soils that are frequently flooded while a small area in the
northwest corner is occasionally flooded. Areas along the northeast and southeast edges of the Project
Area are moderately eroded while a small area at the northern edge is considered severely eroded. The
bulk of the Project Area, however, includes well drained loams ranging from 0 to 10 percent slope.
Steeper slopes (10 to 25 percent) are present at the southern end as well as the eastern edge and within
the central and northern portions of the Project Area. Table 1 presents the soil types found within Project
Area and serves as a key to Figure 2.
2.1

Map Unit Description
Symbol
Buncombe loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent
BUB slopes, frequently flooded
Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
ChA frequently flooded
Congaree loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
CoA frequently flooded ks ;
Dorian fine sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent C eek
DoB slopes, rarely flooded G t
LcB Lloyd loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
t
LcC Lloyd loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
LcD Lloyd loam, 10 to 15 percent slopes
Lloyd clay loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes,
a ks
LdB2 moderately eroded
Lloyd clay loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes, PaE3
LdC2 moderately eroded ,� oA LCB L6C
Madison -Bethlehem complex, 10 to 25
MhE2 percent slopes, moderately eroded ♦ Doh LdC2
Pacolet clay loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes, C^hA
PaE3 severely eroded _
BB LCB
PeE Pacolet soils, 10 to 25 percent slopes • U
Roanoke loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes,
RkA occasionally flooded I PaE3 MCI ♦ t' LcB
• RkA � ■ �
00
oB
40
i
100 3
ChA �'• ♦� �s ,� d
m
rE 3
PaE3
;r 1 LCl ChA ■'
`'' • �, i LcC LcB O
€� ""• `�� ; PaE3 - �' � -
■ MhE2 �dC2
+
Of
o- j • "s-4., _, _ PaE3 ± � r
��I LdC2 `���; dC2 Z
`� PaE3 Lc Lid4111,
B
LdC21� LCB' 'cB r
'rIlk ate •,to 10
M�E2. �� °
yW �0 - Mccaslin Pl m
nOM"'80, ZA�, 4�M,'
Notes
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North
Carolina FIPS 3200 Feet
2. Data Sources: ESRI, Microsoft, INC Geodetic
Survey, USDA NRCS SSURGO Soil Survey
3. Orthoimagery © INC OneMap, NC Center for
Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
.. 0 500 1,000
N
C � Project Area Feet
a soils (At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:12,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-23
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
Client/P.ject 203401902
Microsoft
MS CLT1O Environmental Permitting
Title
Soils Map
Page 2.2
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
Table 1 Soils in the Project Area
Symbol
Map Unit Name
% Slope
Drainage Description
BuB
Bumcombe loamy sand, frequently flooded
0-5
Excessively Drained
ChA
Chewacla loam , frequently flooded
0-2
Somewhat Poorly Drained
CoA
Congaree loam, frequently flooded
0-2
Moderately Well Drained
DoB
Dorian fine sandy loam, rarely flooded
0-6
Moderately Well Drained
LcB
Lloyd loam
2-6
Well Drained
LcC
Lloyd loam
6-10
Well Drained
LcD
Lloyd loam
10-25
Well Drained
LdB2
Lloyd clay loam, moderately eroded
2-6
Well Drained
LdC2
Lloyd clay loam, moderately eroded
6-10
Well Drained
MhE2
Madison -Bethlehem complex, moderately eroded
10-25
Well Drained
PaE
Pacolet soils, severely eroded
10-25
Well Drained
PaE3
Pacolet clay loam
10-25
Well Drained
RkA
Roanoke loam, occasionally flooded
0-2
Poorly Drained
2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES
The character of the topography, the proximity of water resources, and the types of soils all have a direct
effect on the variety of flora that is attracted to the setting and in turn, the fauna that relies on that
ecological setting for sustenance. The quantity and variety of both plants and animals in an area has a
direct influence on human habitation. Native American populations successfully utilized a wide variety of
native flora and fauna whose seasonal availability was well known to them.
During the Holocene, prior to European contact, this region of North Carolina supported a diverse biotic
and floral community. The riverine area was dominated by hardwoods, including chestnut, hickory, and
several species of oak, as well as several soft woods, such as southern pines and hemlock (NCpedia
n.d.; North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 2018a, 2018b).
Today the Piedmont region is largely forested with conifers in the dry steep slopes and ridgetop habitats;
oaks (scarlet, chestnut, post, and blackjack), hemlock, and hickory are also present and in floodplains.
Ash, red maple, oaks (willow and swamp chestnut), sycamore, box elder, American elm, river birch, tulip
poplar, and sweetgum are prevalent. The habitat supports numerous bird species, such as cardinals,
black and mallard ducks, Canada goose, wild turkey, mourning dove, and raptors, including great horned
owl and red -shouldered hawk. White-tailed deer, beaver, bobcat, coyote, gray and red fox, fox and
southern flying squirrels, mink, muskrat, racoon, and striped skunk are also present. The Piedmont
province is also inhabited by numerous amphibians, reptiles, and fish, including black and white crappie,
bluegill, crayfish, largemouth bass, and Roanoke hogsucker, Corn snakes, cottonmouth, eastern box
2.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
turtle, and southern leopard frog are also present (NCpedia n.d.; North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission 2018a, 2018b).
2.4

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT
Native American occupation in North Carolina's Central Piedmont region can generally be divided into
three primary periods: Paleoindian (prior to 9500 years before present (BP), Archaic (8000 to 4000 years
BP), and Woodland (4000 to 400 years BP). These divisions are based on changes in material culture
and settlement systems (OSA n.d.; Friends of North Carolina, Inc. 1984). In recent decades, the
possibility of human presence in the region that pre -dates the Paleoindian period has moved from remote
to probable. For this reason, a Pre -Clovis discussion precedes the traditional tripartite division of North
Carolina's Native American history. Seventeenth -through twentieth-century historical overview has also
been included. The cultural context, as defined by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation and Chapter 3 of the OSA's 2017 guidelines,
provides the historic, social, and environmental information required for evaluation of any cultural
resources present within the proposed Project Area.
3.1 PRE -CONTACT NATIVE AMERICAN CONTEXT
3.1.1 Pre -Clovis (?-13,000 BC)
The 1927 discovery of a fluted point in the ribs of an extinct species of bison at Folsom, New Mexico
proved that ancient North Americans had immigrated during the Pleistocene. It did not, however,
establish the precise timing of the arrival of humans in the Americas, nor did it adequately resolve
questions about the lifestyle of those societies (Meltzer 1988:2-3). Both the stratigraphic record and the
radiocarbon assays from several sites, including the Cactus Hill site in Sussex County, Virginia (Site
44SX0202), suggest the possibility of human occupation of North America before the fluted -point makers
appeared on the scene (McAvoy and McAvoy 1997). Buried strata at the Cactus Hill Site have returned
radiocarbon dates of 15,000 years ago from strata situated below levels containing fluted points (McAvoy
and McAvoy 1997:165). To date only a handful of pre -Clovis sites have been identified in North America,
including in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and New Mexico, and more recently potentially in Idaho and
Washington (Wade 2019; Davis et al. 2019; Waters et al. 2011). Though the likelihood of identifying pre -
Clovis sites within the Project Area is extremely low, it is possible that pre -Clovis peoples inhabited the
Catawba County region
3.1.2 Paleoindian Period (PRIOR TO 9500 BC)
In the decades following the discovery at Folsom, New Mexico, the association of fluted points with the
bones of large, extinct mammals, in particular mastodons, on the western plains coupled with the scarcity
of other Paleoindian sites, led to the inference that the Paleoindian subsistence strategy centered on the
pursuit of big game. This picture, however, exaggerates the reliance of western Paleoindian groups on
large game, and appears to be of limited relevance to eastern Paleoindian life. The archaeological data
from Virginia compiled by Dr. Ben McCary records numerous discoveries of fluted points, but no
3.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
unambiguous association between extinct large game and fluted points (Boyd 1989:139). A similar
situation occurs throughout the eastern United States. For this reason, many archaeologists now hold that
eastern Paleoindians were generalized foragers (e.g., Grayson and Meltzer 2003; but see Fiedel and
Haynes 2004).
Most large Paleoindian sites in the southeastern United States are quarry or quarry -related (Meltzer
1988:21), though multiple band aggregation sites also occur (McAvoy 1992:145). Recognizable sites
most often result from long-term habitation or repeated use of the same location. It follows from the
presence of primarily quarry or quarry -related sites that stone outcrops were regularly revisited. Though
the full range of available lithic resources was used to manufacture fluted points (e.g., Phelps 1983), a
number of studies have noted a focus on cryptocrystalline materials (e.g., chert, jasper, chalcedony)
(Gardner 1974, 1989; Goodyear 1979). The recovery of cryptocrystalline materials at locations far
removed from quarries indicates exchange, extensive group movement, or both characterized the
Paleoindian era. In addition, the very limited differences between sites and within sites suggest that most
people had access to all available resources, while the small size of most Paleoindian sites indicates
group size generally was limited to extended families. Evidence of the Paleoindian period, in the form of
fluted points produced from rhyolite, has been found in the eastern North Carolina Piedmont (Perdue and
Oakley 2010; Daniel 2005). Paleoindian period sites are best represented in the Carolina Slate Belt,
particularly the Uwharrie Mountains in Stanly and Montgomery counties to the southeast of the Project
Area. The concentration of Paleoindian activity in this region may be associated with the presence of
outcrops of fine-grained rhyolite (Ward and Davis 1999).
The Hardaway Site in Stanly County, located approximately 48 kilometers (30 miles) down the Yadkin
River from the town of Salisbury and southeast of the Project Area, contains Paleoindian period
components and is one of the best-known prehistoric sites in the North Carolina Piedmont (Fuka et al.
2022). The site includes evidence of continuous use from as early as 14,000 years ago to the historic
period (Barnes 2007). Joffre Coe's late Paleoindian through Early Archaic period chronological sequence
based on Hardaway -Palmer -Kirk Complex lithic traditions was derived from data collected at this site
during excavations in the 1950s (Fuka et al. 2022).
3.1.3 Archaic Period (8000-4000 BC)
The Paleoindian period transitioned into the Archaic period in part due to climate change resulting in the
extinction of large game. This transition included a shift from large game hunting to a seasonal rotation of
hunting and gathering. Archaic peoples continued to live a primarily nomadic lifestyle; however, there is
evidence that some settled into larger and more permanent sites. From the coast to the mountains, the
Archaic period began with wandering bands of hunter -gatherers who faced a wide variety of changing
environmental conditions. These bands occasionally came together at favored locations in major river
valleys, but most of their time was spent scattered across the landscape foraging for food and raw
materials. As Archaic peoples became more familiar with their environments, they learned which plants
were edible and better understood the habits of their quarry. These advancements in knowledge led to
advancements in technology. For instance, the increased use of flora in part led to the development of
3.2

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
grinding stones and mortars. Increased evidence of fire cracked rock (FCR) on Archaic sites reveal
advancements in cooking. The development of the atlatl with polished weight stones, and the polished
grooved axes found on Archaic sites are further evidence of an evolution in stone tool technology as well
as material culture. Toward the end of the Archaic period, large groups began to settle more permanently,
living most of, if not all, of the year in areas rich in raw material and food resources (Perdue and Oakley
2010).
3.1.4 Woodland Period (4000-400 BP)
The increased sedentism of the Late Archaic period ushered in the Woodland period, which was
characterized in part by the use of horticulture. Horticultural practices represented the beginnings of plant
domestication, including corn, beans, squash, and sunflowers. The development of ceramic technology
and the use of pottery for cooking and storing of food is also a defining characteristic of the Woodland
period. In addition, changes in stone tool manufacturing occurred during this period, including such
innovations as the production of small triangular project points for use with the bow and arrow (Coe and
Wilson 1976.:2-6; Perdue and Oakley 2010). Both large and small camps became common, as did larger
and permanently occupied villages with substantial houses of wood or wattle and daub and thatched
roofs. Some seasonal movements to collect available plants or hunt animals was still common during the
Woodland period.
The introduction of ceramic technology is a hallmark of the Early Woodland period. Based especially on
data from the Doerschuck Site in Stanly County, Badin, Yadkin, Vincent, and Clements ceramic phases
are used to define the Early and Middle Woodland chronology in the region starting with the Badin phase
(Ward and Davis 1999). Badin vessels are characterized as well -made, straight -sided jars with conical
bottoms made from clay coils tempered with sand or pebbles. Common surface treatments are cord -
wrapped and fabric -wrapped paddle stamping. The high quality of Badin vessels has raised the question
of a possible technological predecessor between the Late Archaic and Early Woodland periods (Coe
1964). Possible pre-Badin specimens, for example, have been discovered in ceramic assemblages from
Site 31 CH8 in the Haw River valley (Claggett and Cable 1982).
Broad-spectrum hunting -fishing -gathering continued to characterize the region as a whole throughout the
Middle Woodland period. Shellfish, anadromous and resident fishes, deer, waterfowl, and turkey ranked
high among the important fauna in the Middle Woodland diet. Various nuts, amaranth, and chenopod
seeds also appear to be important resources during this period. After 300 BC, large shell middens
containing dense concentrations of artifacts become increasingly common, indicating repeated use of at
least one type of site. Middens and the presence of houses at a number of sites indicate longer stays,
though populations remained far from sedentary (Gallivan 2003). People continued to reside for much of
the year in relatively small settlements, and interior storage features rarely occur on Middle Woodland
sites (Gallivan 2003:75-98).
3.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Overall, the Middle Woodland of the North Carolina Piedmont is marked by adaptations of styles and
techniques of neighboring regions. The primary use of sand -tempered ceramics is seen as having been
influenced by cultures from coastal regions to the south, while the use of cord- and fabric -wrapped
paddles to treat the surfaces of pottery is a tradition from the north in Virginia (Ward and Davis 1999).
The Late Woodland period of the North Carolina Piedmont marks the beginning of regional and societal
processes described as the Piedmont Village Tradition. Population density continued to rise, and
settlements increased in size. An increase in conflict is interpreted based on the presence of larger
villages with defensive stockades. Still, smaller hamlets persist well into the Late Woodland (Ward and
Davis 1999). The increase of an agricultural subsistence strategy is seen as a major influence of these
practices. This increasing dependence on agriculture is reflected in large storage pits for holding surplus
crops (Coe 1952; Newkirk 1978; Woodall 1990).
Intensified use of cultivated plants, particularly maize, beans, and squash, distinguished the Late
Woodland adaptation from that of earlier periods. European accounts describe a heavy reliance on slash -
and -burn agricultural methods. In addition to cultigens and shellfish, Late Woodland peoples throughout
the region continued to rely on various mammals, fish, and birds for sustenance (Dent 1995:251).
Perhaps as a consequence of the greater importance of cultigens in the diet, access to expanses of
arable land ranks among the most important factors influencing site selection (Dent 1995; Potter 1993).
3.2 HISTORIC CONTEXT
The English first arrived in the region that would become North Carolina in the late sixteenth century, after
Spanish and Italian explorers had already visited the area, and found it inhabited by multiple American
Indian groups. Some of these groups had previously been encountered by the Spanish, who were the first
Europeans to explore the North Carolina region in the early sixteenth century. Spanish expeditions
included those launched by Francisco Gordillo and Pedro de Quejo in 1521 and Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon
in 1526. An Italian explorer, Giovanni da Verrazano, also visited the general vicinity in 1524. These
Spanish forays into the North Carolina region were generally brief and no permanent settlements were
established (Powell 1989; Olsen and Millis 2003). However, these expeditions made inroads into the
North Carolina Piedmont region, wherein modern Catawba County is located.
Some of the earliest European/Native American interactions in the region that would become Catawba
County likely occurred around 1567, the year in which Juan Pardo led a Spanish expedition that explored
what would eventually become modern North and South Carolina as well as eastern Tennessee. When
Pardo reached the Catawba River, he noted in his journal that the area was controlled by the Catawba
people (Hudson 1990). However, it appears likely that extended interactions between Europeans and the
Catawba did not begin until the late seventeenth century, possibly around 1670 when the Charles Towne
colony was being established (Moore 2006).
3.4

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
By the first decade of the 1700s, hostilities between European colonists and several Native American
tribes across the southeast reached a boiling point, resulting in two armed conflicts known as the
Tuscarora War (1711-1715) and Yamasee War (1715-1717), respectively (Powell 1989). In his accounts
of his travels throughout the Carolina backcountry, colonist John Lawson (1709; see Fenn and Wood
2003) noted some of the primary issues that led these conflicts, including European encroachment on
traditional lands, hunting rights, and Indian enslavement. Despite Native Americans participating on both
sides of each of these conflicts, ultimately the Europeans were the victors. The Tuscarora War ended in a
short-lived treaty after more than 1,400 Native Americans were killed by violence or disease and some
1,000 more were enslaved (Powell 1989). During the so-called Yamasee War, the Catawba and other
tribes lent support to the Europeans against the Yamasee and their tribal allies. That conflict ended with
in 1717; however, the consequences of both conflicts were far reaching. Following the conflict, the
Carolinas were no longer proprietary colonies but belonged entirely to the English Crown as colonial
expansion continued. In addition, Native American populations had suffered due to death and
enslavement and the tribal confederacies were reconfigured as Native peoples were further pushed from
their homelands (Fuka et al. 2022; Powell 1989).
The earliest permanent Europeans settlements in what would later become Catawba County were
established around the 1750s and were occupied by colonists of German, Swiss, and/or Scotch -Irish
descent (Bayley 2006). Each group had different reasons for moving to the region. For instance, the
German and Swiss communities were looking for greater political and religious autonomy in addition to
economic advancement whereas the Scotch -Irish were often fleeing persecution during the reign of King
James I (Preslar 1954). Regardless of the motivations, these groups often arrived in the region from as
far north as Pennsylvania. While the Germans tended to settle south of the Catawba River, the north side
of the river was more frequently settled by Scotch -Irish colonists (Preslar 1954:39-41).
Regardless of their nation of origin, European settlers in the area that would become Catawba County,
like those throughout the North Carlina colony, primarily engaged in agriculture, which would remain a
key industry into the twentieth century (Freeze 1995; Catawba College 2021; Catawba County
Government 2020a; Hahn 1911:7 and 10-11). In addition to agriculture, gold mining also became a
successful industry in the region at the turn of the nineteenth century, with Catawba County as part of one
of the country's largest gold -producing areas (Catawba County Government 2020).
By the early nineteenth century, the residents of what was then northern portion of Lincoln County north
of the Catawba River, began to become increasingly dissatisfied with their access to county services and
became increasingly isolated from the southern half of the county as communities expanded and grew.
Efforts to form a new county to resolve some of these issues was spearheaded by Nathanial Wilson, a
descendant of Irish immigrants, who was elected to the state's House of Commons in 1842 on the
promise of splitting off from Lincoln County (Preslar 1954:219; Corbitt 1987:91; Catawba County
Government 2020a).
3.5

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
The petition made by the residents was successful, and at the end of 1842, Catawba County, named after
the region's Catawba tribe, was officially established. The county was then bounded by Iredell, Lincoln,
Caldwell, Alexander, and Burke counties. In 1845, the new county seat was designated at the town of
Newton, with a courthouse constructed shortly thereafter. It remained the seat of the county until 1924
(Corbitt 1987:92; Preslar 1954:265; Bayley 2006; Catawba County Government 2020a). By the 1850
census, Catawba County residents included 7,293 free individuals, including 21 African American men
and women, and 1,569 enslaved individuals (Hahn 1911:7).
In the mid -nineteenth century, in the decades following the creation of Catawba County, the area outside
of Newton was agrarian with a vast majority of residents employed as farmers or day laborers. During the
mid -nineteenth century, crops included cotton, potatoes, corn, wheat, and other grains, as well as various
fruits. Dairy and cattle farming and bee keeping were also part of the agrarian economy (Hahn 1911:7;
Bayley 2006).
During this time, the town of Newton, one of the few incorporated towns within the county in the mid -
nineteenth century, had approximately 9,065 free residents, including 32 African Americans. The
occupations listed reflect those of a mid -nineteenth century rural town, albeit the county seat, and
included house carpenters, shoe, cabinet, and carriage makers, saddlers, and blacksmiths. Other
occupations included teachers, which suggest the town had a school, a preacher, doctor, tailor, tanner,
hotelier, and stage driver (United States Federal Census 1860; Hahn 1911:7-8). The latter two indicate
Newton had a hotel for passengers traveling by stagecoach from other areas of North Carolina and likely
beyond. In addition, in 1860, approximately 1,664 enslaved individuals were enumerated in the census for
both the county and within the town of Newton (United States Federal Census — Slave Schedules 1860).
The landscape of Catawba remained rural and agrarian through the remaining decade of the nineteenth
century; however, the population of Catawba County steadily increased. In 1890, just over 18,600
residents lived in the county. By 1910, the number had risen to just under 28,000 (Hahn 1911:8). Farming
still employed most of the residents outside of the four main towns. A majority of the residents in the
surrounding area of Conover, the location of the proposed project, were employed as farmers or farm
laborers. The handle factory and the railroad employed some residents but were a distance second in
total numbers. Others were employed at a wagon factory, in the building trades, and cottage industries
such as blacksmithing, shoe making and as dressmakers (United States Federal Census 1900).
During the next several decades, with the increase in new manufacturing facilities, the rural areas of the
county experienced some residential growth. However, farming still employed a significant number of
residents in the rural areas. By 1930, in and in the vicinity of the towns of Newton and Maiden, a large
number of people were employed at the cotton mill, hosiery, handle, furniture, chair, and glove factories,
the ice and rubber plants, and the railroad. Several other main employers included colleges, sawmills,
and a carriage factory (United States Federal Census 1930).
3.6

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Resulting, in part, from the increase in manufacturing, the population of Catawba County as a whole also
increased. In 1930, the county contained just under 44,000 residents. By 1940, the population had
increased to 51,653 and by 1950, to 61,794 (United States Census 1950:33-10). Manufacturing continued
to thrive through the twentieth century, with approximately 40 percent of the population of the county
employed in industrial -related jobs. Agriculture, with advancements in technology and production
methods such as erosion mitigation, diversification of crops, and new ways to maintain healthy soils, also
flourished (Preslar 1954:488-490). While manufacturing increased in the county, the area in the vicinity
remained decidedly agrarian into the mid -to late twentieth century.
In the late twentieth century, Catawba County became more accessible with the construction of 1-40
which was completed in the mid-1970s. Today, while still rural in many respects, Catawba County retains
its textile and furniture manufacturing as a major economic base while expanding into the
telecommunications market. Additionally, new business sectors in biomedical and pharmaceutical
manufacturing as well as retail development and marketing efforts to attract tourists and retirees have
expanded the county's economic base. The County has also expanded its infrastructure, improved its
roads and highways as well as its public education system (Catawba County Government 2020a).
3.7

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
4.0 HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
Historic maps were reviewed as part of the background research conducted for the archaeological
survey. Online map repositories, including the Library of Congress, the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Historical Topographic Map Explorer, the online David Rumsey Map Collection hosted by
Cartography Associates, and state and county maps of Virginia compiled online at www.mapgeeks.org
were examined to identify historic maps which depict the Project Area. The details and observations from
this review are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2 Summary of Observations for Historic Maps
Figure
Year
Observations, Property and Adjoining Sites
This map shows key terrain throughout North Carolina, including mountains and rivers. The
3
1765
Catawba River and the then South Carolina state line are depicted as are settlements along
waterways. Mountains separate the Project Area from land noted as being occupied by the
"Cherakees." The map offers no details of the Project Area vicinity.
This map offers little detail of the Project Area but does depict major waterways and some
topography in the wider region. Roads are also shown to the east and west of the Project Area
4
1777
vicinity. The region was within Tryon County until its dissolution in 1779, when it was divided
into Lincoln and Rutherford counties. Later markings depict the route of Cornwallis' march from
Charleston in 1780, to the southeast of the Project Area vicinity
This map depicts the Project Area within what was then Lincoln County but offers no details
5
1814
within the Project Area itself. In the wider region, landscape features including mountains are
shown as are major waterways and roads as well as key towns.
This map show roadways, waterways, and Catawba County but offers no details within the
6
1854
immediate Project Area vicinity. In the wider region, some topography is illustrated and towns,
such as Newton to the north of the Project Area, are shown as well as mills along waterways
and some additional stand -along structures along roadways.
This map depicts roadways and waterways in the wider Project Area vicinity. The town of
Maiden is depicted to the southeast and farmsteads with landowner/resident names as well as
schools and churches are also depicted. Clarke's Creek is shown along the western edge of the
7
1886
Project Area and the forerunner of modern W Maiden Road (State Highway 2007) is shown at
the southern end of the Project Area. While there is no indication of occupation within the
Project Area itself, a house associated with R. England is located a short distance to the east
while the house of M.V. Ramsbur is shown south of the roadway a short distance southeast of
the Project Area.
This map does not offer detail for the Project Area, though major waterways and railroads, as
8
1934
well as towns are shown in the wider region. The map does, however, indicate that the Project
Area is located in a region known for moderate erosion and gullies.
Table 3 Summary of Observations for USGS Topographic Maps
Figure
Year/Quad
Scale
Observations, Property and Adjoining Sites
This map depicts Clarke's Creek as well as the forerunner to W
Maiden Road (State Highway 2007) in the immediate vicinity of
1895
the Project Area. Waterways, roads, and a rail line are shown in
9
(Hickory, North Carolina)
1:125,000
the wider area, with numerous structures shown within the town
of Maiden to the southeast. Though the map is of a scale that
does not allow for a direct and accurate overlay of the Project
4.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
Area boundary, it is possible that it shows a structure within the
Project Area, south of the roadway.
map depicts the Project Area as rural and undeveloped.
1954
Roadways, waterways, and the railroad are depicted in the
vicinity, as well as the town of Maiden to the southeast. While
10
(Charlotte, North
1:250,000
no evidence of occupation is shown within the Project Area, the
Carolina)
southern end is depicted as wooded while the remainder is
shown as open land.
North;
Not to Scale"'.
Ili �x['?'1 E`S ]ai•) i rr��.r" �%rflf'�lrXlt'
ti
QP • ti�
P.7'
�
�, �•�
t�
rPl*
IIII �t�v rr A
7KA
.. Y
Project Area
Vicinity
•.,.
fW�l f4. �~ •.i_
ram•
4
_
/+ram
.� r
A
Ali u ffit
� w � — � � � rr ...!lr
r (7V�fJi'P .T.
Figure 3 Detail of A new map of North & South Carolina, & Georgia Depicting the Project
Area Vicinity (Kitchin 1765; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division).
4.2

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
4.1
North; {1 �' %
Not to Scale
Project Area
1[r. Vicinity44
h"o) ' r
a
R N y \ ,
! � 1�r►m{rtw Mi
Figure 4 Detail of Carolina septentrionale et meridionale en 4 feuilles, traduite de
I'Anglois Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (Le Rouge et al. 1777; Library of Congress
Geography and Map Division).
4.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
North;
. rr
r
P
f
h -
....
►I r 4
:, .
r f �i i � 1
�•_ - J _
-
-
-�
+
• • it
�
�
ti
10
f ti�
r y
Figure 5 Detail of North Carolina Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (Carey 1814; Librar
of Congress Geography and Map Division).
4.4

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
JYd We I .
North; ~1
Not to Scale
1`
''�`use
le
AI
•� �� i Project Area `
Vicinity f
r .(`�<<,�+ 1ti'� ►lt �f r �� ` P fir.
r 1■
(A lYlrflIld/r7 J
■ ��!' r J.r, J,l. .41
y�.� - h •�.�.�. - �. - {�} ' .�. 7-
1 � 4
Figure 6 Detail of A new map of the state of North Carolina: constructed from actual
surveys, authentic public documents and private contributions Depicting the Project
Area Vicinity (Williams 1854; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division).
4.5

A PHASE IARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292ACRE
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
North;
Not Na bScale
JPP0121.
t
'
■+
■c ■
+
s�
N1. � �«
o� %
A
.
�
w /
4
f kw "
Pr elm
m
ydn6
4. J
P£A�_d
¢
G41k
Figure 7 Detail of Map of Catawba Count North Carolina Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (Yoder 1886; Library of Congress Geography and Map Division)
4.6

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
North;
Not • Scale
4 i Project
Vicinity
i*
y�
Figure 8 Detail of Reconnaissance erosion survey of the State of North Carolina
Depicting the Project Area Vicinity (United States Soil Conservation Service 1934; Library
of Congress Geography and Map Division.
4.7

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
Not to Scale
MJ
Figure 9 Detail of 1895 Hickory, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area Vicinity
(USGS 1895; http://historicalmaps.arcqis.com/usgs/, Accessed 2022).
4.8

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW
North; dP
Not to Scale
Figure 10 Detail of 1954 Charlotte, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area
Vicinity (USGS 1954; http://historicalmaps.arcqis.com/usgs/, Accessed 2022).
4.9

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
RESEARCH DESIGN
5.0 RESEARCH DESIGN
5.1 OBJECTIVES
The Phase I cultural resources survey was designed to locate and identify archaeological resources
within the Project Area. Stantec designed the survey to obtain sufficient information to make
recommendations about the research potential of identified cultural resources based on each resource's
potential eligibility for listing on the NRHP. A cultural resource is gauged to be significant if it meets at
least one of four NRHP criteria:
A. Associated with significant events in the broad patterns of national history.
B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
C. Representative of a type, period, or method of construction, or the work of a master.
D. Capable of yielding important information about the past.
Criterion D typically applies to archaeological sites. In order to be capable of yielding important
information about the past, generally a site must possess artifacts, soil strata, structural remains, or other
cultural features that make it possible to test historical hypotheses, corroborate and amplify currently
available information, or reconstruct the sequence of the local archaeological record.
5.2 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
The background research for the Phase I archaeological survey included an on -site review and collection
of data from the North Carolina OSA. The NC OSA files of archaeological sites were examined, and
information was retrieved on sites located within a 1.6-kilometer (1-mile) radius of the survey corridor.
Additionally, North Carolina Historic Preservation Office (NC HPO) files of architectural surveys were
examined, and information was retrieved on sites located within a 1.6-kilometer (1-mile) radius of the
survey corridor. Background research also focused on relevant sources of local historical information and
available historical maps, which were examined to provide an historical context for the Project Area and
to check for any buildings and other cultural features present within the Project Area.
5.2.1 Archaeological Sites
No previously recorded archaeological sites are located within the Project Area. Four previously recorded
archaeological sites are located within a 1.6-kilometer (1-mile) radius of the Project Area (Table 4; Figure
11). Of the four total previously recorded archaeological sites in the vicinity of the Project Area, three are
Native American and one is historic. None of these sites has been formally evaluated for potential NRHP
eligibility.
5.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
RESEARCH DESIGN
Table 4 Previously Identified Archaeological Sites within a 1-Mile Radius of the Project
Area
Resource
Resource Type
Association
Reference
NRHP Status
31 CT129
Lithic Scatter
Pre -Contact
McCabe et al. 1978
Unassessed
31 CT261
Cemetery
19th Century
Farrow & Idol 2016
Unassessed
31 CT285
Lithic Scatter
Pre -Contact
O'Neil 2022
Unassessed
31CT286
Lithic Scatter
Pre -Contact
O'Neil2022
Unassessed
5.2.2 Architectural Resources
No previously recorded architectural resources are located within the Project Area. Seven previously
recorded architectural resources are located within a 1.6-kilometer (1-mile) radius of the Project Area
(Table 5; Figure 12). Of these, the majority (n=6) represent houses with no recorded date though one
dates to 1845. The additional resource is the Carolina Mills, also with no recorded date of construction.
One architectural resource, the 1845 William Pinckney Reinhardt House (CT0416) has been listed on the
NHRP. The remaining architectural resources within the Project Area vicinity have not been formally
evaluated to potential NRHP eligibility.
Table 5 Previously Identified Architectural Resources Within a 1-Mile Radius of the
Project Area
Site #
Resource Type
Date
Recorded By
NRHP Recommendation
CT0416
William Pinckney Reinhardt House
1845
Kooiman 1989
NRHP Listed 1990
CT0476
House
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Unassessed
CT0543
House
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Unassessed
CT0640
Joe Reinhardt House
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Unassessed
CT0751
Carolina Mills
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Unassessed
CT0764
Parker House
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Unassessed
CT0857
Mike Keener House
n.d.
Unknown 1977
Demolished
5.2

77
CT261
- �, ' � � +dam —_�;�..•
, ..:�- �.9,�, _
CT285 t •� _
��
�A
VA
J Ptl , r
72
. 1 ` �• --� �. r
CT129 At r-
r'"
N
.. 0 1,250 2,500
C � Project Area Feet
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
Historic Site Location
1:30,000
- Prehistoric Site Location
® Surveyed Area ® Stantec
Q 1-Mile Buffer
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-23
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01.03
Client/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Virginia South
FIPS 4502 Feet Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Microsoft, Stantec, NC Geodetic Survey, and
NC State Historic Preservation Office
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Title
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Previously Identified Archaeological
Sites within a 1-Mile Radius of the
Project Area Page 5.3
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

4T 1 /ri
CT0416 1+_
�''-i.-ti.-a:`/ "°' 7 I /�` _,-✓%tea , `'�J f 1�+r _ �` -)�7
r. _♦ 4.'
� r
00
CT0543
�� f �-/ _�� � •� ` -.
— -�
� Lam` ,Ir/// // - --�
CT0751
/ Y, - �- (
•�.
7V
l yr, b
�� p .il slltlt'f:
1
�� � 7 CT0857
do
0 1,250 2,500 N
National Register individual listing Feet
Surveyed Only (At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:30,000
• Surveyed, Gone
11 Project Area
Stantec
0 1-Mile Buffer
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
Cli ""P"", 203401902
Microsoft
Motes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Virginia South
FIPS 4502 Feet Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Microsoft, DCR, NC Geodetic Survey, and NC �2
State Historic Preservation Office
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Title
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Previously Identified Architectural
Resources within a 1-Mile Radius of the
Project Area Page 54
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
6.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
6.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
6.1.1 Shovel Testing
Stantec field archaeologists conducted systematic pedestrian survey throughout the entire 118.17-
hectare (292-acre) Project Area in conjunction with systematic shovel testing. The Project Area was
divided into five survey areas (Areas A—E) for greater ease in recordation. Shovel tests were excavated at
no greater than 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals along transects spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart. Radial
shovel tests were excavated at 15-meter (49.2-foot) intervals around positive shovel tests to determine
the extent of newly identified cultural resources. Shovel tests were not excavated in areas exhibiting more
than 15 percent slope, that were wet, or that were determined to retain a low probability following the
pedestrian survey.
All shovel tests measured approximately 38 centimeters (15 inches) in diameter and were excavated to
sterile subsoil. Soil from all shovel tests was passed through '/4-inch mesh screen. For each excavated
shovel test, the stratigraphic profile was recorded with complete descriptions using Munsell color
designators (Munsell Color 1994) and U. S. Department of Agriculture soil texture terminology (Soil
Survey Staff 1999).
• A (Topsoil or surface vegetation) — Organic or humus layer consisting of grass, leaf litter, or other
surface materials.
• Ap (Plow Zone) — A horizon soils that have been impacted by plowing and agricultural practice;
usually an organic layer that has formed through decomposition of A horizon soils mixed with
leftover organic matter from agricultural practices.
• E (Eluviated) — Leached of clay, minerals, and organic matter, leaving a concentration of sand
and silt particles of quartz or other resistant materials — missing in some soils but often found in
older soils and forest soils. Often interpreted as a transition layer between A and B horizon soils;
often present in intact archaeological site settings and is representative of a living surface.
• B (B Horizon [Subsoil]) — Rich in minerals that leached (moved down) from the A or E horizons
and accumulated here. Typically denoted as the culturally sterile B Horizon (Subsoil) as deposits
tend to predate human occupation.
All pertinent data including: the site location, the location of features, any permanent landmarks, the
topography, the vegetation, any disturbed areas, the location of surface survey, and subsurface tests
including metal detector hits was digitally collected utilizing ESRI's Collector for ArcGIS installed on Apple
iPads enabled with GPS location services and supplemented by a Trimble R1 GPS Receiver. Field
survey notes were collected by Stantec's Project Archaeologists and Crew Chief documenting daily
progress, conditions, and access issues.
6.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
6.1.2 Laboratory Methods
All archaeological data and specimens collected during the archaeological survey were transported to
Stantec's laboratory in Richmond, Virginia, for processing and analysis. Prior to washing, artifacts from a
given provenience were first emptied into a screened basket and sorted. Next, the provenience
information from the field bags was confirmed with the bag catalog and transferred onto bag tags. Stable
objects were washed with tap water using a soft brush. Washed items were then placed by provenience
on a drying rack.
Once dry, the artifacts were re -bagged by provenience and material type. Artifacts of a given provenience
were placed in clean 2-millimeter (0.08-inch) thick re -sealable polyethylene bags that were perforated to
allow air exchange. After processing and re -bagging, the entire artifact assemblage was then cataloged
for analysis. Stylistic attributes were described using current terminology and recorded by count into a
database for analysis.
6.1.3 Definitions
This field survey designated the archaeological site as any apparent location of human activity from
casual or single -episode discard, to having sufficient archaeological evidence to indicate further testing
would produce interpretable archaeological data.
6.1.4 Expected Results - Archaeological Site Identification
Native American sites are generally found within 305 to 457 meters (1,000 to 1,500 feet) of a significant
water source, on moderately well- to well -drained soils on low relief landforms. The Project Area is
located adjacent to Clarke's Creek and exhibits both areas of relatively level land and areas in excess of
10-25 percent slopes. The western edge of the Project Area, along the creek, includes soils classified as
frequently flooded; however, the interior of the Project Area is primarily well drained. across gently sloping
land, with relatively level area present. Three Native American archaeological sites have been previously
identified within a 1.6-kilometer (1-mile) radius of the Project Area. All three sites are lithic scatters of
indeterminate temporal affiliation. These sites are located along the west bank of Clark Creek and the
south side of Betts Branch, a tributary of Clark Creek. While few Native American sites have been
recorded in the Project Area vicinity, this may be a function of lack of archaeological survey rather than an
indication of a lack of sites in the area. Given the location of the Project Area in proximity to water
sources, and the presence of some relatively level, well drained landforms within, there is a moderate
probability for the Project Area to contain additional Native American resources.
The Project Area primarily crosses woodland, agricultural areas, and small sections of marsh land. As
historic map review has shown, there has been limited residential activity in the vicinity. Only one
previously identified archaeological site, a nineteenth-century cemetery (Site 31CT261), within a 1.6-
kilometer (1-mile) radius of the Project Area was historic. However, a topographic map from 1895 (see
Figure x) indicates that a structure may have been present in the southern portion of the Project Area at
least as early as the late nineteenth century. In addition, a 1970s topographic map (not shown) depicts a
6.2

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
house in roughly the same location as that on the 1895 map, and said house was within the Project Area
boundary. In addition, a second house was present along the northern edge of the Project Area on the
1970 map, just south of the transmission line corridor. Therefore, there is a high probability of finding
historic sites within the Project Area, likely dating from the late nineteenth century to the twentieth
century.
6.2 REPORT PREPARATION
The results of the archival research, fieldwork, and laboratory analysis were synthesized and summarized
within this report. The report describes the results of each of these facets of the Phase I survey research
and is illustrated by selected maps and drawings. Appendix A presents a descriptive catalog of all
artifacts recovered from surface and excavated contexts. Appendix B represents archaeological site
forms. Appendix C presents resumes for key personnel.
6.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The Project Area comprises woodland, previously logged areas, and overgrown brush. The Project Area
is bounded to the south by West Maiden Road, to the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes
Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and to the north by a transmission line corridor and private
parcels. Old Maiden Road extends into the southern portion of the Project Area.
7.2 AREA A
Area A is located at the southern portion of the Project Area and is bordered to the west by Clark Creek,
to the south by West Maiden Road, to the north by Area B and Old Maiden Road, and to the east by Zeb
Haynes Road and private parcels. A sewer line extends north to south on the east side of Clark Creek
along the western edge of Area A. The southeastern corner of the area exhibits steeply sloping terrain
while the remainder of Area A comprises gently sloping open grass field and new growth woodland
(Figures 13-15).
A total of 121 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals along 11 transects (Transects
A—H, W, Y, and Z) spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart within Area A. Ten shovel tests were not
excavated primarily due to their location within roads and on steep slope (Table 6). No shovel tests were
positive for cultural material and no new archaeological sites were identified during survey within Area A
(Figure 13).
Table 6 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area A
STP Count
STP Number
Location
5
B26, W3-5, Z8
Slope
2
A22, A32
Old Roadbed
2
B16-17
B16
1
G2
Push Pile
A representative shovel test profile for Area A (STP D3) consisted of two strata. Stratum I was
characterized as a layer of 5YR3/4 dark reddish -brown sandy clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in
depth from approximately 0 to 30 centimeters (0 to 11.81 inches) below ground surface. Underlying
Stratum I was Stratum II, a layer of 2.5YR5/8 red sandy clay (Subsoil). Stratum 11 was excavated from
approximately 30 to 40 centimeters (11.81 to 15.75 inches) in depth (Table 7).
7.1

g �44 $LL
7. Rn
V3N � i
CL
jp o E m=wo IS'
rn ? a d U 4 o iQ
22 ,4J
p o r © E E E v o y E .o Z= N o n 5 g m
i `w 5® N
R H z a` L a` 'x ca ¢ A ci 'o n 3 N E
�a 8
F IDI
Maided SP.611 s
� _ t
aM e
J
s
/
r
e'o o - i o � rc ♦ - - � s
a '
Q � m t f' rc � i U !�♦
-
F N Y 'mi•
■ E _
1 Z� •fEe y C� mtl F
■ � � � a b M
■ _ _ 6 tl
p p p a 0 � - i� ►` O tl m p � Y - if m w ¢ tlU p t9
rc a i� =►t�, O e _ m �i
Y a Jy tl LL p
a p nz i gJ mU' o G'
mam mm��am s
a „ a
a ^ < m
N as a
a ,y
a
a
W ym�
m
i
'Yr •� - t -,, . ti� � � L �� W Nyaid nod -

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
J&y
Figure 14 General Conditions of Open Fields within Area A; View to the South.
Figure 15 General Woodland Conditions within Area A; View to the West.
7.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Table 7 STP D3 Soil Profile in Area A
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-30
5YR3/4 Dark Reddish Brown
Sandy Clay Loam
A Horizon
11
30-40
2.5YR5/8 Red
Sandy Clay
Subsoil
7.3 AREA B
Area B is located in the southern half of the Project Area and is bordered to the south by Area A, to the
west by Clark Creek, to the north by Area C, and to the east by private parcels. A sewer line extends
north to south along the western edge of the area. The western and southern portions of Area B comprise
sloped terrain while the remaining terrain within Area B predominantly consisted of gently sloping open
grass fields with overgrown brush and woodland (see Figure 13; Figures 16 and 17).
A total of 238 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals along 22 transects (Transects
A—O, AA—FF, and JU) spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart within Area B. Eight shovel tests were not
excavated in otherwise testable areas primarily due to their location on steep slope (Table 8). One shovel
test was positive for cultural material and three radial shovel tests were excavated at 15-meter (49.2-foot)
intervals around positive tests to determine the bounds of this newly identified cultural resource. No radial
shovel tests were positive for additional cultural material. Shovel testing resulted in the identification of
one new archaeological site (31CT296) within Area B (see Figure 13).
Table 8 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area B
STP Count
STP Number
Location
7
L14, M6, N6-7, 02-4
Slope
1
L9
Ditch
A representative shovel test profile for Area B (STP C10) consisted of two strata. Stratum I was
characterized as a layer of 5YR5/3 reddish -brown clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth from
approximately 0 to 10 centimeters (0 to 3.94 inches) below ground surface. Underlying Stratum I was
Stratum 11, a layer of 5YR7/2 pinkish -gray clay (Subsoil). Stratum II was excavated from approximately 10
to 30 centimeters (3.94 to 11.81 inches) in depth (Table 9).
Table 9 STP C10 Soil Profile in Area B
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-10
5YR5/3 Reddish Brown
Clay Loam
A Horizon
II
10-30
5YR7/2 Pinkish Gray
Clay
Subsoil
7.4

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 16 General Conditions in Northern Portion of Area B; View to the East.
Figure 17 Woodland Conditions within Area B; View to the West.
7.5

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.4 AREA C
Area C is located in the northwest portion of the Project Area and is bordered to the east by Area D, to
the south by Area B, to the west by Clark Creek, and to the north by private parcels. The terrain within
Area C comprises light woodland, gently sloping open grass fields, and wetland areas. A transmission
line corridor extends along the northern edge of Area C (see Figure 13; Figures 18 and 19).
A total of 178 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals along 23 transects (Transects
A—W) spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart within Area C. Seven shovel tests were not excavated in
otherwise testable areas primarily due to their location within a sewer line, but also within a ditch and
standing water (Table 10). No shovel tests were positive for cultural material and no new archaeological
sites were identified during survey within Area C (Figure 13).
Table 10 Explanation of Unexcavated Shovel Tests in Area C
STP Count
STP Number
Location
5
00, Q8, RO, L10, VO
Sewer Line
1
B3
Road
1
W2
Standing Water
A representative shovel test profile for Area C (STP M3) consisted of two strata. Stratum I was
characterized as a layer of 7.5YR4/3 brown sandy loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth from
approximately 0 to 30 centimeters (0 to 11.81 inches) below ground surface. Underlying Stratum I was
Stratum 11, a layer of 7.5YR6/4 light brown sandy clay (Subsoil). Stratum II was excavated from
approximately 30 to 50 centimeters (11.81 to 19.69 inches) in depth (Table 11).
Table 11 STP M3 Soil Profile in Area C
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-30
7.5YR4/3 Brown
Sandy Loam
A Horizon
II
30-50
7.5YR6/4 Light Brown
Sandy Clay
Subsoil
7.6

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 18 General Conditions in Eastern Portion of Area C; View to the West.
:d ko
bv
41
k
Figure 19 Woodland Conditions in Western Portion of Area C; View to the East.
7.7

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.5 AREA D
Area D is located in the central northern portion of the Project Area and is bordered to the west by Area
C, to the east by Area E, and to the north and south by private parcels. A transmission line corridor
extends northwest to southeast through the northern portion of Area D. Area D primarily comprises
woodland with some small areas of open grass (see Figure 13; Figures 20 and 21).
A total of 182 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals along 18 transects (Transects
A—P, Z, and YY) spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart within Area D. Four shovel tests were positive for
cultural material and 12 radial shovel tests were excavated at 15-meter (49.2-foot) intervals around
positive tests to determine the bounds of newly identified cultural resources. Six radial shovel tests were
positive for additional cultural material. Shovel testing resulted in two new archaeological sites (31 CT294
and 31 CT295) within Area D (see Figure 13).
A representative shovel test profile for Area D (STP E4) consisted of two strata. Stratum I was
characterized as a layer of 5YR4/3 reddish -brown sandy clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth
from approximately 0 to 15 centimeters (0 to 5.91 inches) below ground surface. Undelrying Stratum I
was Stratum 11, a layer of 5YR5/8 yellowish -red clay (Subsoil). Stratum 11 was excavated from
approximately 15 to 25 centimeters (5.91 to 9.84 inches) in depth (Table 12).
Table 12 STP E4 Soil Profile in Area D
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-15
5YR4/3 Reddish Brown
Sandy Clay Loam
A Horizon
11
15-25
5YR5/8 Yellowish Red
Clay
Subsoil
a
7.8

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 20 Woodland Conditions in Northern Portion of Area D; View to the South.
A�"
Figure 21 Open Grasslands in Central Portion of Area D; View to the South.
7.9

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.6 AREA E
Area E is located in the far northeastern portion of the Project Area and is bordered to the west by Area
D, to the south by private parcels and Zeb Haynes Road, and to the north and east by private parcels. E
comprises recently logged ground with significant ground disturbance from heavy machinery, including
deep rutting, push piles, and expanses of subsoil on the ground surface (see Figure 13; Figures 22 and
23).
A total of 13 shovel tests (STPs JU1—JU13) were judgmentally placed in testable areas within Area E. No
shovel tests were positive for cultural material; however; artifacts were collected from two separated
exposed ground surface areas. Surface collection resulted in the identification of two new archaeological
sites (1901-03 and 1901-04) within Area E (see Figure 13).
A representative shovel test profile for Area E (STP JU8) consisted of two strata. Stratum I was
characterized as a layer of 5YR5/2 reddish -gray sandy clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth from
approximately 0 to 30 centimeters (0 to 11.81 inches) below ground surface. Underlying Stratum I was
Stratum 11, a layer of 5YR5/2 reddish -gray clay (Subsoil). Stratum 11 was excavated from approximately 30
to 40 centimeters (11.81 to 15.75 inches) in depth (Table 13).
Table 13 STP JU8 Soil Profile in Area E
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-30
5YR5/2 Reddish Brown
Sandy Clay Loam
A Horizon
II
30-40
5YR5/2 Reddish Brown
Clay
Subsoil
7.10

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 22 General Conditions in Eastern Portion of Area E; View to the East.
Figure 23 Disturbed Ground Conditions within Area E; View to the South.
7.11

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.7 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESULTS
7.7.1 Newly Recorded Archaeological Sites
Five new archaeological sites were identified during Phase I survey of the Project Area. Two sites
(31 CT294 and 31 CT295) were identified within Area D, two sites (31 CT296 and 31 CT297) were identified
within Area E, and one site (31CT298) was identified within Area B.
7.7.1.1 31 CT294
Site Date: Early 20t" Century
Site Type: Artifact Scatter
Site Size: 78-x-48 meters/0.24 hectare
Survey Methodology: 30-meter (98.4-foot) interval shovel tests w/ 15-meter (50-foot) radials
Total Shovel Test Pits: 10
Positive Shovel Test Pits: 4
Prehistoric Artifacts: 0
Historic Artifacts: 10
Features: Push Pile of Architectural Debris
Recommendations: Not Eligible; No Further Work
Site 31 CT294 is an early twentieth-century artifact scatter centered around an architectural debris push
pile. The site is located northwest of Haynes Drive and east of Clark Creek in an open grass field
surrounded by light woodland in the northern portion of Area D. Situated on Lloyd loam at or near
approximately 303 meters (994 feet) amsl, Site 31 CT294 measures approximately 78-x-48 meters (256-x-
157 feet) with the long axis extending north to south and encompasses approximately 0.24 hectare (0.52
acre) in extent (see Figure 13; Figures 24-26). A total of 10 artifacts were recovered within the bounds of
the site.
A representative shovel test profile for Site 31 CT294 (Area D STP A2) consisted of two strata. Stratum I
was characterized as a layer of 5YR4/4 reddish -brown sandy clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in
depth from approximately 0 to 15 centimeters (0 to 5.91 inches) below ground surface. Underlying
Stratum I was Stratum 11, a layer of 5YR5/8 yellowish -red clay (Subsoil). Stratum II was excavated from
approximately 15 to 25 centimeters (5.91 to 9.84 inches) in depth (Table 14).
Table 14 STP A2 Soil Profile in Site 31 CT294
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-15
5YR4/4 Reddish Brown
Sandy Clay Loam
A Horizon
11
15-25
5YR5/8 Yellowish Red
Sandy Clay
Subsoil
7.12

Notes
- 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane
m Virginia South FIPS 4502 Feet
2. Data Sources: ESRI, Microsoft, INC Geodetic
�l Survey
3. Orthoimagery © INC OneMap, NC Center for
'a Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Y
C:0
Project Area
Historic Artifact
Primary Negative Shovel Test Pit
Primary Positive Shovel Test Pit
Radial Negative Shovel Test Pit
17
Radial Positive Shovel Test Pit
•
Chimney Standing
QArchaeological
Site
Cultural Survey Area
Slope
75 150 N
Feet
(At original document size of 8.5x11)
1:1,800
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-20
TR by BJW on 2023-024
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
Client/Phject 203401902
Microsoft
MS CLT17 Environmental Permitting
Archaeological Sites 31CT294 and
31CT295
Page 7.13
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 25 General View of Site 31CT294 within Area D; View to the North.
Figure 26 Architectural Debris Pile Site 31CT294; View to the Northwest.
7.14

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Originally identified on Transect A in Shovel Test 1 in Area D, newly identified Site 31CT294 entirely
comprised historic domestic material. The site yielded: two colorless Automatic Bottle Machine (AMB)-
bottle glass fragments (1904-), one soda lime ABM bottle glass fragment (1904-), one colorless uranium
glass ABM bottle glass fragment (1904-), one lightweight ABM amber beer bottle glass fragment (1939-),
one molded white milk glass fragment, one molded frosted exterior and pink interior glassware fragment
(twentieth century), one press -molded Ironstone rim sherd (1842-), one wheel -thrown alkaline glazed
American stoneware body sherd, and one wheel -thrown smooth alkaline glazed American stoneware
body sherd with reddish brown paste and grog temper (possibly Edgefield Pottery; c. 1810 to twentieth
century) (Table 15; Figure 27; Appendix A).
Table 15 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT294
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Stratum
Total
Domestic
Bottle
glass
automatic
bottle, beer
Al s
1
1
machine amber
automatic
machine
bottle
A1s
1
3
colorless
soda lime
automatic
Al
1
1
lass
machine
refined
press molded/
Ceramic
earthenware
Ironstone/White
Al
1
1
Granite
wheel thrown/
stoneware
American
Al
1
1
Stoneware
A1w
1
1
Glassware
glass
molded
A1s
1
1
milk glass
molded white
unid
A1w
1
1
container
Domestic Total
10
Grand Total
10
The artifacts recovered from Site 31CT294 entirely comprised domestic material. This material included
bottle glass, glassware, and ceramic sherds. Bottle glass (n=5; 50 percent) was the most frequent artifact
type encountered. All bottle glass appeared to be twentieth century in date. Glassware was also present
and included fragments that also appeared to date to the twentieth century. The ceramic assemblage
included two American stoneware sherds which characteristics possibly indicative of the Edgefield
Pottery, which produced similar wares from the early nineteenth century through the twentieth century
and Ironstone also has a long production period from the early nineteenth century into the present. Given
that no additional nineteenth century material was identified, it appears likely that these ceramic sherds
date to the twentieth century period of production. All artifacts were recovered from a shallow A Horizon
and no evidence of subsurface features was present.
7.15

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 27 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31CT294. A: Amber Beer
Bottle Glass Fragment; B: Possible Edgefield Pottery American Stoneware Sherds; C:
Flashed Pink Frosted Glassware Fragment; D: Uranium Glass Fragment; E: Colorless
ABM Bottle Glass Fragment; and F: Ironstone Rim Sherd.
While no architectural artifacts were recovered from shovel tests and no subsurface features were
encountered, a push pile containing architectural debris was present within the site (see Figure 26),
indicating the demolition of a former structure. Site 31 CT294 is situated in the location of a house
depicted at the end of a driveway on a 1970 topographic map (Figure 28) and remains on topographic
maps through 1993. However, while a house is also visible in this location on aerial photographs as early
as 1951 (NETROnline, Accessed 2023), the structure appears to be gone from these photographs by
1998, suggesting that it was demolished sometime between 1993 and 1998.
7.16

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
North;
Not to Scale -
Site 31CT294 Vicinity
1 r �{ "dip
a y1tg 3
r�
Project Area
Vicinity
ow
Figure 28 Detail of the 1970 Maiden, NC Topographic Map Depicting the Project Area and
Site 31CT294 (USGS 1970; USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer (arcgis.com),
Accessed 2023).
Recommendations: Site 31 CT294 represents an early twentieth-century artifact scatter and architectural
push piles associated with the occupation of a former structures. The structure, which appears to have
been a house, seems to have been demolished sometime in the early to mid-1990s and aerial images of
the location from 1998 on no longer show structure in this location. The recovered artifact assemblage
included bottle glass, glassware, and ceramic sherds, all of which appeared to date to the early twentieth
century. While push piles including architectural debris were present, no intact surface or subsurface
architectural features (foundations, piers, chimneys, etc.) were present. In addition, the recovered
assemblage was all collected from Stratum I (A Horizon) and the site location had been impacted by the
prior demolition and clearing of the former structure. Given the relatively recent date of the recovered
cultural material, the lack of features associated with the former structure, and the disturbed nature of the
site setting, the site appears to retain no subsurface integrity and little to no research potential. Stantec
recommends Site 31CT294 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through
C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further archaeological
work is recommended for this resource.
7.17

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.7.1.2 31 CT295
Site Date: Late 19th to Mid-20th Century
Site Type: Artifact Scatter
Site Size: 65-x-58 meters/0.25 hectare
Survey Methodology: 30-meter (98.4-foot) interval shovel tests w/ 15-meter (49.2-foot) radials & surface
collection
Total Shovel Test Pits: 12
Positive Shovel Test Pits: 6
Prehistoric Artifacts: 0
Historic Artifacts: 70
Features: None
Recommendations: Not Eligible; No Further Work
Site 31 CT295 is a late nineteenth to early twentieth-century artifact scatter. The site is located northwest
of Haynes Drive in an open field surrounded by light woodland in the central portion of Area D. Situated
on Lloyd loam and Lloyd clay loam at or near approximately 269 meters (881 feet) amsl, Site 31 CT295
measures approximately 65-x-58 meters (213-x-190 feet) with the long axis extending north to south and
encompasses approximately 0.25 hectare (0.62 acre) in extent. A pile of modern debris such as
corrugated metal, plywood sheets, and plastic containers, was present within the site and subsoil was
exposed on the ground surface in the location of a former outbuilding (see Figures 13 and 24; Figures
29-31). A total of 70 artifacts were recovered within the bounds of the site.
A representative shovel test profile for Site 31 CT295 (Area D STP E5) consisted of two strata. Stratum
was characterized as a layer of 5YR4/2 dark reddish -gray sandy clay loam (A Horizon) and extended in
depth from approximately 0 to 18 centimeters (0 to 7.09 inches) below ground surface. Underlying
Stratum I was Stratum 11, a layer of 5YR5/8 yellowish -red clay (Subsoil). Stratum II was excavated from
approximately 18 to 28 centimeters (7.09 to 11.02 inches) in depth (Table 16).
Table 16 STP E5 Soil Profile in Site 31CT295
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-18
5YR4/3 Dark Reddish Gray
Sandy Clay Loam
A Horizon
11
18-28
5YR5/8 Yellowish Red
Clay
Subsoil
7.18

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 29 General View of Site 31CT295 within Area D; View to the Southeast.
�� t III � �j'��r r•S l� �Ix {PF
...
Y
,-� '9` 7, F.� 4'iti�,�l �.. � �� S 4; 1. Y _!►. .C.'�.� -]-- Yt _ A _
�� 4p,�,�,!!
�fVACRIIO WA
Wr
•4`" � � 9 -�' � n' � -- yam, � 3 �n - ' S �
Figure 30 Structural Debris within Push Pile at Site 31CT295; View to the West.
7.19

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 31 Disturbed Ground Surface in Location of Former Outbuilding at Site 31CT295
with Hunting Blind in Trees at Back Left; View to the South.
Originally identified on Transect E in Shovel Test 2, in Area D, newly identified Site 31 CT295
predominately comprised historic domestic material. The site yielded: two colorless window glass
fragments, one molded aqua bottle glass fragment, one colorless molded glass jar fragment, one molded
soda lime bottle glass fragment (1864-), six ABM soda lime bottle glass fragments (1904-), one mold -
blown amber bottle glass fragment with molded lettering (nineteenth century type), one mold -blown aqua
pharmaceutical bottle glass fragment (1874-1920), one lightweight amber beer bottle fragment (1939-),
one molded white milk glass fragment, 14 white molded milk glass canning jar lid liner fragments (1869-),
one aqua molded canning jar lid liner fragment (1869-), three press -molded hard paste body porcelain
sherds, one hard paste porcelain body sherd with figural design, one molded hard paste porcelain rim
sherd, one press -molded creamware rim sherd with engine -turned slip decoration (1790-1820), 12 press -
molded Ironstone body sherds (1842-), one press -molded Ironstone body sherd with basketweave design
(1842-), one press -molded hand -painted Ironstone rim sherd (1842-), one press -molded Ironstone base
sherd (1842-), five press -molded Ironstone plain and rounded style rim sherds (c. 1870-1880), one press -
molded sponged whiteware body sherd (c. 1820-1860), two press -molded whiteware body sherds (1820-
), one wheel -thrown American stoneware body sherd with Albany slip (c.1900), four wheel -thrown
Southern alkaline smooth glazed American stoneware body sherds with reddish brown paste with grog
temper and muddy olive -brown alkaline glaze (possibly Edgefield Pottery; c. 1810—into twentieth century),
one wheel -thrown Southern alkaline smooth glazed American stoneware rim sherd with reddish brown
paste with grog temper and muddy olive -brown alkaline glaze (possibly Edgefield Pottery; c. 1810—into
7.20

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
twentieth century), one unidentified lead fragment, one iron strap fragment with rivets, two charcoal
fragments, and one butchered mammal bone fragment (Table 17; Figure 32; Appendix A).
Table 17 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT295
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Stratum
Total
Architectural
Window
glass
colorless
SC1
Surface
2
Architectural Total
2
Domestic
Bottle
glass
automatic
bottle, beer
SC1
Surface
1
machine amber
mold blown
bottle
E2
1
1
amber
mold blown
jar
SC1
Surface
1
aqua
pharmaceutical
E2e
1
1
vial/bottle
molded aqua
bottle
E5w
1
1
molded
jar
SC1
Surface
1
colorless
soda lime
automatic
glass
machine
bottle
SC1
Surface
2
colorless
E5e
1
3
molded
bottle
E2e
1
1
colorless
E5w
1
1
Canning jar
milk glass
molded white
lid liner
SC1
Surface
14
lid liner
Ceramic
porcelain
molded/ Hard
SC1
Surface
1
Paste
press molded/
SC1
Surface
3
Hard Paste
molded
SC1
Surface
1
decoration
refined
press molded/
slip decorated
SC1
Surface
1
earthenware
Creamware
press molded/
Ironstone/White
SC1
Surface
18
Granite
E2n
1
1
hand painted
SC1
Surface
1
press molded/
E2e
1
2
Whiteware
sponge
SC1
Surface
1
molded/
stoneware
American
Albany slip
SC1
Surface
1
Stoneware
wheel thrown
E5
I
1
7.21

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Stratum
Total
wheel thrown/
American
Stoneware
SC1
Surface
2
E2e
1
1
impressed
SC1
Surface
1
Glassware
milk glass
molded white
unid tableware
E5w
1
1
Domestic Total
63
Floral/Faunal
Mammal
bone
SC1
Surface
1
wood
charcoal
E2e
1
2
Floral/Faunal Total
3
Unknown
Strapping
iron
rolled/sheet
SC1
Surface
1
Unidentified
Object
lead
unidentified
manufacture
SC1
Surface
1
Unknown Total
2
Grand Total
70
The artifacts recovered from Site 31CT295 predominately comprised domestic material (n=63; 90
percent). Architectural debris and unknown material (n=2; 3 percent, respectively) and floral and faunal
material (n=3; 4 percent) comprised the remainder of the assemblage. While architectural material was
present, it was limited in both quantity and type with only two fragments of window glass recovered. Both
of these fragments were present on the ground surface in the same vicinity as other surface artifacts,
including iron strapping, a lead object of indeterminate function, and domestic material, including bottle
glass and ceramic sherds. This surface material was present in an aera exhibiting subsoil on the surface
(see Figure 31) and which appears to be the location of a former outbuilding which has been demolished.
In addition to the window glass fragments on the ground surface, a pile of modern architectural debris
including corrugated metal and plywood sheets was present in the area, possibly associated with the
former structure or other trash dumping activity in the area (see Figure 30).
The majority of the recovered artifact assemblage included domestic material. This material was
dominated by ceramic sherds (n=35; 55.6 percent), with milk glass lid liner fragments (n=14; 22.2
percent) and bottle glass (n=13; 20.6 percent), representing the next most frequent domestic artifact
types. A single fragment of table glass (1.6 percent) was also present. Nearly 48 percent of this material
was recovered from the ground surface. Much of the glass assemblage comprised milk glass lid liner
fragments. While none of these mended, they likely represent fragments of one or more canning jar lid
liners. These liners date from the late nineteenth century into the twentieth century. Bottle glass included
types produced from the mid- to late nineteenth century into the twentieth century as well as types with
production periods beginning in the early twentieth century. One beer bottle fragment was of a type with a
production period beginning as recently as 1939.
7.22

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 32 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31CT295. A: Iron Strapping
Fragment; B: Window Glass Fragment; C: Milk Glass Lid Liner Fragment; D: Possible
Edgefield Pottery Stoneware Sherd; E: Ironstone Sherd with Molded Basketweave and
Rope Motifs; F: Pharmaceutical Vial/Bottle Fragment; G: Lead Object; H: Aqua Bottle
Glass Fragment; I: Amber Bottle Glass Fragment; J: American Stoneware Sherd; K:
Creamware Rim Sherd; L: Ironstone Rim Sherd; and M: Sponged Whiteware Sherd.
The ceramic assemblage primarily included ware types with long production periods (i.e., whiteware and
Ironstone). These ware types were produced from the early nineteenth century into the present. However,
a few of these sherds exhibited decorative elements with shorter production periods, such as a sponge
decorated whiteware sherd (c. 1820-1860) and an Ironstone rounded style rim sherd (c. 1870-1880).
The earliest recovered ceramic was an engine -turned slip decorated creamware rim sherd (1790-1820).
Given the lack of evidence for other late eighteenth century cultural material, this sherd likely dates to the
nineteenth century end of its production period. However, the presence of those sherds with production
periods falling solidly within the nineteenth century suggests that the site may have been occupied prior to
the turn of twentieth century with later activity in the twentieth century.
7.23

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
In addition to the aforementioned artifacts, two charcoal fragments and one butchered mammal bone
fragment were recovered from the ground surface. There was no evidence of a burned feature (fire pit,
burned brush pile, etc.). However, a hunting blind is located in the trees nearby the site (see Figure 31).
While the charcoal and bone could be associated with prior nineteenth to twentieth century occupation in
this location, it is also possible that these surface artifacts represent intrusions from more recent hunting
activity.
While architectural artifacts were recovered from ground surface and evidence of modern architectural
debris was located at the site (see Figure 30), no intact surface or subsurface architectural features were
encountered (foundations, builder's trenches, piers, chimney, etc.). Site 31 CT295 is situated in the
location of a structure depicted in aerial photographs from 1951 through 1984 (NETROnline, Accessed
2023). However, this structure appears to be an outbuilding rather than a residence. The structure does
not seem to be present on aerial images from the 1990s through the early 2000s, but this may be a result
of tree cover. In an aerial image from 2010 (Google Earth, Accessed 2023), an outbuilding with a metal
roof is shown in this location with tree cover removed (Figure 33). This structure continues to appear on
aerial photographs through 2021 but is gone by 2022, suggesting that it was demolished in that year.
Site 31 CT295 appears to be an artifact scatter associated with a former outbuilding. This outbuilding may
have been part of a larger farmstead. Site 31 CT294 to the northeast was an artifact scatter associated
with a former house and may have been the primary residence within this farmstead with the outbuilding
at Site 31 CT295 situated at a distance from the residence. The outbuilding at Site 31 CT295 was
demolished as recently as 2022 and the site exhibits significant ground disturbance likely associated with
removal of the structure.
Recommendations: Site 31 CT295 is late nineteenth to mid -twentieth century artifact scatter centered
around push piles of architectural debris likely associated with a former outbuilding. This outbuilding,
which appears on aerial images from as early as 1951 but was demolished sometime between 2021 and
2022, may have been part of a larger farmstead. This farmstead may have included the former house at
nearby site 31CT294. Site 31CT295 primarily included domestic debris with very little architectural
material. However, a pile of modern architectural material, including corrugated metal and plywood was
present and may be related to demolition of the former structure. While 70 artifacts were recovered from
the site, nearly 48 percent of those were collected from the ground surface in area exhibiting subsoil on
surface. In addition, no evidence of surface or subsurface features was present. Due to the level of
ground disturbance, the site appears to lack both depth and research potential. Stantec recommends
Site 31 CT295 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not
considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further archaeological work is
recommended for this resource.
7.24

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 33 Outbuilding in Location of Site 31CT295 with Site 31CT294 to Northeast
(Google Earth 2010; Accessed 2023).
7.25

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
7.7.1.3 31 CT296
Site Date: Early 201h Century
Site Type: Artifact Scatter
Site Size: 25-x-13 meters/0.02 hectare
Survey Methodology: 30-meter (98.4-foot) interval shovel tests & surface collection
Total Shovel Test Pits: 1
Positive Shovel Test Pits: 0
Prehistoric Artifacts: 0
Historic Artifacts: 30
Features: None
Recommendations: Not Eligible; No Further Work
Site 31 CT296 is an early twentieth-century artifact scatter. The site is located north of the juncture of
Haynes Drive and Zeb Haynes Road in an overgrown field of former woodland in the northwest portion of
Area E. Situated on Lloyd loam at or near approximately 278 meters (911 feet) amsl, Site 31 CT296
measures approximately 25-x-13 meters (82-x-43 feet) with the long axis extending east to west and
encompasses approximately 0.02 hectare (0.06 acre) in extent. Site 31 CT296 has been recently logged
and exhibits heavy machine rutting, push piles, log stacks, and areas of exposed subsoil (see Figure 13;
Figures 34-36). A total of 30 artifacts were recovered within the bounds of the site.
A representative shovel test profile for Site 31 CT296 (Area E STP E5) consisted of two strata. Stratum I
was characterized as a layer of 7.5YR4/3 brown sandy loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth from
approximately 0 to 5 centimeters (0 to 1.97 inches) below ground surface. Underlying Stratum I was
Stratum 11, a layer of 7.5YR5/6 strong brown sandy clay (Subsoil). Stratum 11 was excavated from
approximately 5 to 25 centimeters (1.97 to 9.84 inches) in depth (Table 18).
Table 18 STP JU5 Soil Profile in Site 31CT296
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-5
7.5YR4/3 Brown
Sandy Loam
A Horizon
11
5-25
7.5YR5/6 Strong Brown
Sandy Clay
Subsoil
a
7.26

Area D
Y
JU1
4%
JU3 •
JU5
4*♦ �' I
�� '
' 00 1♦♦t
vo •
�i i
31CT296
•
♦♦�
0000
,
JU13
Are •
a E
JU6 JU9 1 •
i
JU11
i
1
JUG �
ti
0
fill, wo��•` 31CT297
�'.'`
JU12 •
0
Z-b-Hayn, i
I ^
N
C-r � Project Area 0®0Feet
Historic Artifact (At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:2,400
Primary Negative Shovel Test Pit
• Chimney Standing
Q Archaeological Site Stantec
Cultural Survey Area Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-20
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
- Low Potential Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03.
Ciienr/Project 203401902
0 Artifact Surface Collection Microsoft
Notes MS CLT17 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Pedestrian Survey 5m
Virginia South FIPS 4502 Feet Figure No -
Data Sources: ESRI, Microsoft, INC Geodetic 34
Survey
Survey
3. Orthoimagery © INC OneMap, INC Center for Tdle
Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board Archaeological Sites 31CT296 and
31 CT297
Page 7.27
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 35 General View of Site 31CT296 within Area E; View to the West.
Figure 36 Machine Made Brick and Mortar Observed on the Ground Surface at Site
31 CT296; View to the North.
7.28

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Identified during surface inspection in the northwestern portion of Area E, newly identified Site 31 CT296
predominately comprised domestic material. The site yielded: two brick bat fragments, one molded aqua
canning jar fragment, four ABM bottle glass fragments (1904-), one colorless ABM Mason jar fragment
(1913-1922), one ABM threaded -lip colorless jar fragment (1904-), one colorless ABM jar fragment with
Hazel Atlas Glass Company maker's mark (c. 1923-1964), one parison mold colorless canning jar
fragment (1904-), one molded cold creme jar fragment (late nineteenth to early twentieth century type),
seven press -molded Ironstone body sherds (1842-), two press -molded hand -painted Ironstone rim sherds
(1842-), three press -molded Ironstone base sherds (1842-), one press -molded Ironstone base sherd with
Edwin Knowles China Company maker's mark (1900—c.1960), one press -molded Ironstone plain and
rounded style rim sherd (c. 1870-1880), one press -molded Ironstone rim sherd with decalcomania (1890-
), two press -molded Whiteware body sherds with flint blue opaque glaze (1848-), and one wheel -thrown
American stoneware crock pot rim sherd with Albany slip (late nineteenth to early twentieth century)
(Table 19; Figure 37; Appendix A).
Table 19 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT296
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Total
Architectural
Brick, bat
ceramic
SC2
2
Architectural Total
2
Domestic
Bottle
glass
automatic machine aqua
bottle
SC2
1
automatic machine
colorless
bottle
SC2
4
jar
SC2
3
molded aqua
bottle
SC2
1
Ceramic
refined
earthenware
press molded/
Ironstone/White Granite
SC2
13
decalcomania
SC2
1
transferprinted
SC2
1
press molded/ Whiteware
SC2
2
stoneware
wheel thrown/ American
Stoneware
Albany slip
SC2
1
Glassware
milk glass
molded white
jar
SC2
1
Domestic Total
28
Grand Total
30
The artifacts recovered from Site 31 CT296 primarily comprised domestic material (n=28; 93 percent).
Architectural material (n=2) comprised the remaining 7 percent of the assemblage. Architectural debris
was limited both in frequency and type, with only two brick bats recovered from the ground surface.
However, brick was also observed on the surface but not collected (see Figure 36), and together this
material may suggest that a structure once stood in the general vicinity, though the limited number of
fragments may indicate that any such structure was at some distance from this location.
7.29

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 37 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31CT296. A: Albany Slip
American Stoneware Crock Lid Sherd; B: Possible Aqua Canning Jar Fragment; C: Milk
Glass Cold Cream Jar Fragment; D: Transferprinted Ironstone Rim Sherd; E: Mason Jar
Fragment; F: Ironstone Sherd; G: Whiteware Sherds; and H: Ironstone Base Sherd with
Partial Makers Mark.
The majority of the recovered assemblage was domestic and included bottle and jar glass as well as
ceramic sherds. The glass assemblage, including both bottle and jar fragments, was generally diagnostic
of the early twentieth century. ABM bottle glass was produced from the early twentieth century onward
and one canning jar fragment included a partial molded decoration designating it a Mason jar
([PER]FECT/[M]ASON), a type produced from 1913-1922). One jar fragment bore the Hazel Atlas Glass
Company maker's mark and had a production period from c. 1923-1964. This was one of only two
artifacts with known production periods extending into the mid- to late twentieth century. The other being
an Ironstone sherd with an Edwin Knowles China Company mark (1900—c. 1960). Given the lack of
additional mid- to late twentieth century material it appears likely that these artifacts date to the early
twentieth century period of production for each type. The ceramic assemblage comprised ware types with
long production periods extending from the early nineteenth century into the twentieth century and
sometimes into the present. Such wares (whiteware and Ironstone) are common on nineteenth and early
twentieth century sites. Since this material was recovered with bottle and jar glass primarily dating to the
early twentieth century, it is likely that the sherds are contemporaneous with that material.
7.30

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
While the artifact assemblage recovered from Site 31 CT296 may suggest the presence of a former
domestic structure in or near this location, it is also possible that it reflects general trash discard or
dumping. There is no documented evidence of a structure at this location on historic maps or in aerial
photographs, with the exception of a 1956 aerial image (NETROline, Accessed 2023), which may show a
structure or other feature. If it is a structure, it appears only in 1956 and was likely a temporary structure.
In addition, it was located south of Site 31 CT296. In addition, all of the material recovered from Site
31 CT296 was collected from the ground surface in an area exhibiting significant ground disturbance
associated with logging, including machine ruts, push piles, and subsurface on the ground surface.
Recommendations: Site 31 CT296 is an early twentieth-century artifact scatter. Though limited
architectural material was present within the assemblage in the form of two small brick fragments and
observed brick on the ground surface, no other physical or documentary evidence of a former structure
was identified. The site contained to surface or subsurface features indicative of structural remains and
the only structure noted in the vicinity appears to have been a temporary structure located south of the
site which appears on a 1956 aerial photograph. This possible structure does not appear on any other
aerial photographs. The scatter primarily includes domestic debris such as bottle and jar glass and
ceramic sherds, the majority of which appear to date to the early twentieth century. This material was
recovered entirely from the ground surface in a very disturbed setting. The site is situated in a recently
logged area and exhibits machine rutting, push piles, log piles, and subsurface on the ground surface in
some areas. Therefore, the site does not appear to be intact and lacks both depth and research potential.
Stantec recommends Site 31 CT296 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A
through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further
archaeological work is recommended for this resource.
7.7.1.4 31 CT297
Site Date: Mid- to Late 19th Century
Site Type: Artifact Scatter
Site Size: 17-x-12 meters/0.01 hectare
Survey Methodology: Surface collection
Total Shovel Test Pits: 0
Positive Shovel Test Pits: 0
Prehistoric Artifacts: 0
Historic Artifacts: 10
Features: None
Recommendations: Not Eligible; No Further Work
Site 31 CT297 is mid- to late nineteenth century artifact scatter. The site is located in an overgrown field of
former woodland north of Zeb Haynes Road in the southwestern portion of Area E. Situated on Lloyd clay
loam at or near approximately 281 meters (923 feet) amsl, Site 31 CT297 measures approximately 17-x-
12 meters (56-x-39 feet) with the long axis extending north to south and encompasses approximately
0.01 hectare (0.04 acre) in extent. The Site 31CT297 vicinity has been recently logged and exhibits heavy
7.31

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
machinery rutting, push piles, log stacks, and areas of exposed subsoil (see Figures 13 and 34; Figure
38). A total of 10 artifacts were recovered within the bounds of the site.
Figure 38 General View of Site 31CT297 within Area E; View to the North.
No shovel tests were excavated in the vicinity of Site 31 CT297 due to the significance of the logging
disturbance. Identified during surface inspection in the southeastern portion of Area E, newly identified
Site 31 CT297 entirely comprised domestic material. The site yielded: one molded soda lime bottle glass
fragment (1864-), two white molded milk glass lid liner fragments (1869-), four press -molded Ironstone
body sherds (1842-), one press -molded shell -edged Ironstone rim sherd (c. 1841—c. 1857), two wheel -
thrown Southern alkaline smooth glazed American stoneware body sherds with reddish brown paste with
grog temper and muddy olive -brown alkaline glaze (possibly Edgefield Pottery; c. 1810—into twentieth
century) (Table 20; Figure 39; Appendix A).
Table 20 Artifacts Recovered from Site 31 CT297
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Stratum
Total
Domestic
Bottle
soda lime
molded colorless
bottle
SC3
Surface
1
lass
Canning jar
milk glass
molded white
lid liner
SC3
Surface
2
lid liner
refined
press molded/
Ceramic
earthenware
Ironstone/White
SC3
Surface
4
Granite
shell edged
SC3
Surface
1
7.32

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Artifact Group
Object
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
Transect
Stratum
Total
stoneware
wheel thrown/
American
Stoneware
SC3
Surface
2
Domestic Total
10
Grand Total
10
Figure 39 Sample of Cultural Material Recovered within Site 31CT297. A: Possible
Edgefield Pottery American Stoneware Sherds; B: Colorless Soda Lime Bottle Glass; C:
Ironstone Sherd; D: Milk Glass Lid Liner Fragments; and E: Shell Edge Ironstone Rim
Sherd.
7.33

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
The artifacts assemblage recovered from Site 31 CT297 entirely comprised domestic material, which
included bottle glass, a glass lid liner fragment, and ceramic sherds. The bottle glass and lid liner
fragments were of type produced beginning in the mid- to late nineteenth century and extending into the
twentieth century. The ceramic sherds were also of types which typically have a long production period
from the early nineteenth century through the twentieth century. However, one Ironstone sherd exhibited
a decorative style that was produced from c. 1841—c. 1857). Given the lack of other definitively twentieth
century material in the assemblage, this sherd suggests that the overall assemblage dates from the mid -
to late nineteenth century.
All of the recovered material was collected from the ground surface in an area exhibiting significant
ground disturbance from recent logging activity, including machine ruts, push piles, log piles, and subsoil
in the ground surface. No evidence of surface or subsurface features was observed and there is no
documented evidence on historic maps, historic topographic maps, or on aerial photographs to indicate
the presence of a structure in this location. It is possible that the material was associated with a nearby
structure that is no longer extant or that it represents general discard/trash dumping from the nineteenth
century.
Recommendations: Site 31 CT297 is a mid- to late nineteenth century artifact scatter. No architectural
material was present in the assemblage and no evidence of a former structure was observed in or around
the site. All artifacts were collected from the ground surface in an area exhibiting significant logging -
related ground disturbance, including machine rutting, push piles, log piles, and subsoil on the ground
surface in some areas. The artifact scatter appears to be a limited scatter of general domestic debris and
the disturbance indicates the site lacks depth, integrity, and research potential. Stantec recommends
Site 31CT297 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not
considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further archaeological work is
recommended for this resource.
7.7.1.5 31 CT298
Site Date: 191" to 201" Century
Site Type: Isolated Find
Site Size: 5-x-5 meters/0 hectare
Survey Methodology: 30-meter (98.4-foot) interval shovel tests w/ 15-meter (49.2-foot) radials
Total Shovel Test Pits: 4
Positive Shovel Test Pits: 1
Prehistoric Artifacts: 0
Historic Artifacts: 1
Features: None
Recommendations: Not Eligible; No Further Work
Site 31 CT298 is an isolated find comprising a single whiteware body sherd with Willow pattern. The
artifact was located in light woodland north of a residential property at the junction of Old Maiden Road
and Zeb Haynes Road in the southeastern portion of Area B. The isolated find was situated on Lloyd
loam at or near approximately 264 meters (865 feet) amsl (see Figure 13; Figures 40 and 41).
7.34

CC5
CC4
CC5
CC2
CC '7
V
17
CC1
DD4
DD2
DD3
17
DD1
17
Area B
DD6 CDS
V
DD7
V
0
,
FF3N
V
FF1
FF4
FF3 FF3 FF3E
j
V
OL
W
'A►
Notes
- 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane
m Virginia South FIPS 4502 Feet
2. Data Sources: ESRI, Microsoft, INC Geodetic
�l Survey
3. Orthoimagery © INC OneMap, NC Center for
'a Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Y
C:0
Project Area
Primary Negative Shovel Test Pit
Primary Positive Shovel Test Pit
Radial Negative Shovel Test Pit
•
Chimney Standing
QArchaeological
Site
Cultural Survey Area
- Slope
75 150 mN
Feet, - \
(At original document size of 8.5x11) (�--(
1:1,200
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-20
TR by BJW on 2023-01-24
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-03
C"I"Phject 203401902
Microsoft
MS CLT17 Environmental Permitting
Archaeological Sites 31CT298
Page 7.35
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
Figure 41 General View of Site 31CT298 within Area B; View to the East.
A representative shovel test profile for Site 31 CT298 (Area B STP FF3) consisted of two strata. Stratum I
was characterized as a layer of 7.5YR4/3 brown silty loam (A Horizon) and extended in depth from
approximately 0 to 25 centimeters (0 to 9.84 inches) below ground surface. Underlying Stratum I was
Stratum 11, a layer of 7.5YR4/3 brown clay (Subsoil). Stratum 11 was excavated from approximately 25 to
35 centimeters (9.84 to 13.78 inches) in depth (Table 21).
Table 21 STP FF3 Soil Profile in Site 31CT298
Stratum
Depth (cm)
Color
Soil Type/Texture
Interpretation
1
0-25
7.5YR4/3 Brown
Silty Loam
A Horizon
11
25-35
7.5YR4/3 Brown
Clay
Subsoil
Originally identified on Transect FF in Shovel Test 3 in Area B, newly identified Site 31CT298 comprised
a single press -molded whiteware body sherd with Willow pattern Whiteware (1820-). Three radial shovel
tests were excavated around STP FF3 to determine the bounds of the site; however, no radial shovel
tests were positive for additional cultural material. In addition, no additional material was observed on the
ground surface and no evidence of surface or subsurface features was identified.
Recommendations: Site 31 CT298 is an isolated find comprising a single whiteware body sherd with
Willow decoration dating from the nineteenth to twentieth century. No additional cultural material was
present. Stantec recommends Site 31CT298 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D;
Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further
archaeological work is recommended for this resource.
7.36

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From November 28 to December 7, of 2022, Stantec conducted a Phase I archaeological survey of
approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) associated with the proposed Maidens Site (CLT10) in
Catawba County, North Carolina. The Project, as currently designed, will comprise five (5) datacenter
buildings, each with five (5) colos and one (1) administrative building with a total capacity of 240MW.
Located approximately 2.01 kilometers (1.25 miles) northwest of the town of Maiden, the Project Area
was defined as the entire approximately 118.17-hectare (292-acre) parcel and includes woodland,
previously logged areas, and brush. The Project Area is bounded to the south by West Maiden Road, to
the west by Clark Creek, to the east by Zeb Haynes Road (NC 2010) and Springdale Drive, and to the
north by a transmission line corridor and private parcels.
The Phase I survey was designed to locate and identify cultural resources within the defined Project Area
and to obtain sufficient information to make recommendations regarding their potential eligibility for listing
in the NRHP. The overall Project Area encompassed approximately 118.17 hectares (292 acres) in
extent.
Phase I survey included pedestrian survey of the entire Project Area conducted concurrently with
systematic subsurface testing. A total of 732 shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals
along transects spaced 30 meters (98.4 feet) apart throughout the Project Area. Five shovel tests were
positive for cultural material. A total of 15 radial shovel tests were excavated at 15-meter (49.2-foot)
intervals to determine the bounds of newly recorded cultural resources. Six radial shovel tests positive for
additional cultural material. Twenty-five shovel tests were not excavated within otherwise testable areas
due primarily to the presence of slope, standing water, ditches, roads, and a sewer line. Those portions of
the Project Area exhibiting greater than 15 percent slope or evidence of significant logging -related ground
disturbance were not subject to systematic shovel testing. These areas were subjected to pedestrian
survey where possible.
Five new archaeological sites were identified during this investigation (Table 22). Four sites (31 CT294
through 31CT297) are artifact scatters ranging in date from the mid- to late nineteenth to mid -twentieth
century. Site 31CT294 is in the location of a former house while Site 31CT295, a short distance to the
southwest, is in the location of a former outbuilding. These structures, both of which have been
demolished, may have been part of the same larger farmstead. Both sites also exhibit disturbance
associated with demolition of the structures/clearing of the land. Site 31 CT296 is a surface scatter dating
to the early twentieth century and Site 31 CT297 is a mid- to late nineteenth surface scatter. Both of these
sites are located in recently logged areas and exhibit significant ground disturbance. Finally, Site
31CT298 comprises a single whiteware sherd representing an isolated find from the nineteenth to
twentieth century. All of the sites identified within the Project Area exhibited ground disturbance. These
resources lacked depth and integrity and appeared to retain little research potential. As such, Stantec
recommends Sites 31CT294, 31CT295, 31CT296, 31CT297, and 31CT298 as not eligible for listing
on the NRHP under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the
ME

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
evaluation of these resources. No further archaeological work is recommended for the Project
Area.
Table 22 Recommendations for Archaeological Resources within the Project Area
Resource
Resource Type
Association
Stantec Recommendation
31 CT294
Artifact Scatter
2011 c.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT295
Artifact Scatter
Late 19th to Mid-20th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT296
Artifact Scatter
Early 20th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT297
Artifact Scatter
Mid- to Late 19th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
31 CT298
Isolated Find
19th to 20th C.
Not Eligible; No Further Work
E
8.2

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
9.0 REFERENCES
Barnes, Mark R.
2007 The Hardaway Site: A Treasure Preserved. In Mammoth Trumpet 22:9-13.
Bayley, Elizabeth
2006 Catawba County. In Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell. University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Boyd, C.C., Jr.
1989 Paleoindian Paleoecology and Subsistence in Virginia. In Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A
Synthesis, edited by J. M. Wittkofski and T. R. Reinhart, pp. 53-70. Special Publication No. 19 of
the Archeological Society of Virginia. Dietz, Richmond
Carey, Mathew
1814 North Carolina. Library of Congress Geography and Map Collection.
Catawba College
2021 History of Catawba College. Available at: https://catawba.edu/coIlegehistory/, accessed 17
February 2023.
Catawba County Government
2020 About Catawba County. Available from: https://www.catawbacountVnc.gov/county-
government/about-catawba-county/, accessed November 2022
Claggett, Stephen R., and John S. Cable
1982 The Haw River Sites: Archaeological Investigations at Two Stratified Sites in the North Carolina
Piedmont. Vol 1. Commonwealth Associates, Inc., Jackson, Mississippi.
Coe, Joffrey L.
1952 The Cultural Sequence of the Carolina Piedmont. In Archaeology of the Eastern United
States, edited by James B. Griffin, pp. 301-311. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
1964 The Formative Cultures of the Carolina Piedmont. In Transactions of the American Philosophical
Society, N.S. 54(4), Philadelphia.
1995 Tooewn Creek Indian Mound: A Native American Legacy. The University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
9.1

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
Coe, Joffre, and Jack H. Wilson, Jr.
1976 An Archaeological Survey of Randleman and Howard Mills Reservoirs. The Research
Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Corbitt, David Leroy
1987 The formation of the North Carolina counties, 1663-1943. Available from:
https://digital.ncdcr.gov/digital/collection/pl6062coII9/id/290103, Accessed 17 February 2023.
Daniel, Jr., I. Randolph
2005 The Archaeology of North Carolina: the Paleo-Indian Period. In Tar Heel Junior Historian, North
Carolina Museum of History.
Davis, L.G., D.E. Madsen, L. Becerra-Valdivia, T. Highman, D.A. Sisson, S.M. Skinner, D. Stueber, A.J.
Nyers
2019 Late Upper Paleolithic Occupation at Cooper's Ferry, Idaho, USA,—16,000 Years Ago. In Science
Vol. 365:891-897.
Dent, Richard J., Jr.
1995 Chesapeake Prehistory: Old Traditions, New Directions. Plenum Press, New York.
Fenn, Elizabeth A., and Peter H. Wood
2003 The Tuscarora War: North Carolina Before 1770. In The War We Lived in North Carolina,
edited by Joe A. Mobley, pp. 3-106. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina.
Fiedel, Stuart, and Gary Haynes
2004 A Premature Burial: Comments on Grayson and Meltzer's "Requiem for Overkill." In Journal of
Archaeological Science 31:121-131.
Freeze, Gary R.
1995 The Catawbans: Crafters of a North Carolina County 1747-1900. Catawba County Historical
Association, Inc., Newton, North Carolina.
Friends of North Carolina, Inc.
1984 North Carolina Prehistoric, Part One: The Cultural Sequence. In Newsletter of the Friends of
North Carolina Archaeology, Inc. 1(2):9-10.
Fuka, Matthew, Elizabeth Heavrin, Sarah Anderson, Robert Clarke, and Josu6 Nieves
2022 A Cultural Resource Desktop Review for the Proposed CLT-AZ2 Stover Assemblage Site
Catawba County, North Carolina. On File, Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc.
9.2

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
Gallivan, Martin D.
2003 James River Chiefdoms: Thee Rise of Social Inequality in the Chesapeake. University of
Nebraska Press, Lincoln.
Gardner, William M.
1974 The Flint Run Paleoindian Complex: Preliminary Report 1971-73 Seasons. Occasional
Publication No. 1, Department of Anthropology, The Catholic University of America, Washington,
D. C.
1989 An Examination of Cultural Change in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene (Circa 9200 to
6800 B.C.). In Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by J. Mark Wittkofski and
Theodore R. Reinhart, pp. 5-51. Dietz Press, Richmond.
Goodyear, A. C.
1979 A Hypothesis for the Use of Cryptocrystalline Raw Materials among Paleoindian Groups of North
America. Research Manuscript Series No. 156. South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and
Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
Grayson, Donald K., and David J. Meltzer
2003 A Requiem for North American Overkill. In Journal of Archaeological Science 30:585-593.
Hahn, George W.
1911 The Catawba Soldier of the Civil War. Clay Printing Company, Hickory, North Carolina.
Hudson, Charles
1990 The Juan Pardo Expeditions: Explorations of the Carolinas and Tennessee, 1566-1568.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.
Kitchin, Thomas
1765 A new map of North & South Carolina, & Georgia. Library of Congress Geography and Map
Division.
Le Rouge, Georges -Louis, Henry Mouzon, and Charles Cornwallis
1777 Carolina septentrionale et meridionale en 4 feuilles, traduite de I'Anglois. Library of Congress
Geography and Map Division.
Lewis, S., and H.S. Tanner
1805 North Carolina. Library of Congress Geography and Map Division.
9.3

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
McAvoy, Joseph M.
1992 Nottaway River Survey, Part I. Clovis Settlement Patters: The 30-Year Study of a Late Ice Age
Hunting Culture on the Southern Interior Coastal Plain of Virginia. Special Publication No. 28 of
the Archeological Society of Virginia. The Dietz Press, Richmond.
McAvoy, Joseph M., and Lynn D. McAvoy
1997 Archaeological Investigations of Site 44SX202, Cactus Hill, Sussex County, Virginia. Research
Report Series No. 8. Virginia Department of Historic Resources, Richmond.
Meltzer, David J.
1988 Late Pleistocene Human Adaptations in Eastern North America. In Journal of World Prehistory 2:
1-52.
Moore, David G.
2006 Catawba Indians. In Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell. University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Munsell Color
1994 Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation, New
Windsor, NY.
NCPedia
n.d. Wildlife of North Carolina's Piedmont region. NCpedia. Available from
https://www.ncpedia.org/wildlife/piedmont, Accessed November 2022.
Newkirk, Judith A.
1978 The Parker Site: A Woodland Site in Davidson County, North Carolina. MA thesis,
Department of Anthropology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
NETROnline
2023 Conover, North Carolina, Historic Aerials. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer, accessed
January 2023.
North Carolina Department Environmental Quality
2015 Physiographic Provinces of NC. September 29, 2015. Available from:
https://ncdenr. maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=1316f4eb4e3349298c3bd006
3ab8fb89, Accessed November 2022.
North Carolina Geological Survey
1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina, Scale 1:500,000, in color. North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development, Geological Survey Section: Raleigh, North Carolina.
9.4

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
Available from:
https://ncdenr.maps.arcqis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=a8281 cbd24b84239b29cd2ca
798d4al0, accessed November 2022.
North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA)
2017a North Carolina Office of State Archaeology Archaeological Investigation Standards and
Guidelines for Background Research, Field Methodologies, Technical Reports, and Curation.
North Carolina Department of Natural & Cultural Resources. November 2022.
2017b Archaeological Site Form Handbook. Last Updated May 31, 2017. https://files.nc.gov/dncr-
arch/PDF/OSA site form handbook V7.pdf, accessed November 2022.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
2018a Habitats: Piedmont. Learning. Available from: http://ncwildlife.org/Learning/Habitats/Piedmont,
accessed November 2022.
2018b Habitats. Learning. Available from: http://ncwildlife.org/Learning/Habitats, accessed November
2022.
Olsen, Heather, and Heather Millis
2003 Cultural Resources Survey for the Proposed PCS Phosphate Aurora Facility Expansion, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Report submitted to CZR Incorporated by TRC Garrow Associates, Inc.,
Durham.
Perdue, Theda, and Christopher A. Oakley
2010 Native Carolinians: The Indians of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources, Office of Archives and History, Raleigh.
Phelps, David Sutton
1983 Archaeology of the North Carolina Coast and Coastal Plain: Problems and Hypotheses. In The
Prehistory of North Carolina: An Archaeological Symposium, edited by Mark A. Mathis and
Jeffrey J. Crow, pp. 1-51. North Carolina Division of Archives and History, Department of Cultural
Resources, Raleigh.
Potter, Stephen R.
1993 Commoners, Tribute, and Chiefs: The Development of Algonquian Culture in the Potomac Valley.
University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.
Powell, William S.
1989 North Carolina Through Four Centuries. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.
9.5

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
Preslar, Charles J., Jr.
1954 A History of Catawba County. Catawba County Historical Association, Inc., Newton, North
Carolina.
United States Census Bureau
1950 Number of Inhabitants: North Carolina. Available from:
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/decennial/l 950/population-volume-
2/06586136v2p33chl .pdf, Accessed 21 February 2023.
United States Department of the Interior (USDI)
1981 Department of the Interior's Regulations, 36 CFR Part 60: National Register of Historic Places.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
1983 Department of the Interior, Archaeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior's
Standards and Guidelines. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
1991 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin 15. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Interagency Resources Division, Washington D.C.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1895 Hickory, North Carolina 1:125,000 Quadrangle.
1954 Charlotte, North Carolina 1:250,000 Quadrangle.
1970 Maiden, North Carolina 1:24,000 Quadrangle.
United States Soil Conservation Service
1934 Reconnaissance erosion survey of the State of North Carolina. Library of Congress Geography
and Map Division.
Wade, Lizzie
2019 First people in the Americas came by sea, ancient tools unearthed by Idaho river suggest:
16,000-year-old occupation predates possible land route into the continents. Available from: First
people in the Americas came by sea, ancient tools unearthed by Idaho river suggest I Science I
AAAS, Accessed 2023.
Ward, H. Trawick, and R.P. Stephen Davis Jr.
1993 Indian Communities on the North Carolina Piedmont, A.D. 1000 to 1700. Monograph 2.
Research Laboratories of Anthropology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina.
OR

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
REFERENCES
1999 Time Before History: The Archaeology of North Carolina. University of North Carolina Press,
Chapel Hill.
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. In Science
334(6054):351-3.
Web Soil Survey
2022 Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Series
Classification Database. Available from:
httD://soiIS.usda.aov/soils/technical/classification/scfile/index.html Accessed November 2022.
Williams, Wellington
1854 A new map of the state of North Carlina : constructed from actual surveys, authentic public
documents and private contributions. Library of Congress Geography and Map Division.
Williams, Wiley J.
2006 Yamasee War. In Encyclopedia of North Carolina, edited by William S. Powell. University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Woodall, J. Ned
1990 Archaeological Investigations in the Yadkin River Valley, 1984-1987. Publication 25. North
Carolina Archaeological Council, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Yoder, R. A.
1886 Map of Catawba County, North Carolina. Library of Congress Geography and Map Division.
9.7

APPENDICES

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix A ARTIFACT INVENTORY
Appendix A ARTIFACT INVENTORY
`1 A.1
J

Artifact Inventory
MS CL T10
Context Count and Description
31CT298
F.S.#: 13, Transect FF ST 3, Stratum I ON OE
TPQ: 1820
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, Willow pattern (c1792-into 20thc) on
whiteware (1820-). Spalled., Whiteware body sherd
31CT294
F.S.#: 1, Transect A ST 1, Stratum I ON OE
TPQ: 1904
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, Southern smooth alkaline glaze (c1810-into
20thc), muddy olive green brown color. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware. Reddish brown
paste with grog temper., American Stoneware body sherd
1 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, automatic machine, likely ABM (1904-)
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite rim
sherd
F.S.#: 2, Transect A ST Is, Stratum I ON OE
TPQ: 1939
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, lightweight beverage (1939-), bottle, beer, amber
2 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, (1904-), bottle, colorless
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, uranium glass (c1880s-1930). ABM (1904-).,
bottle, colorless
1 Glassware fragment, glass, molded, flashed with pink on interior, frosted exterior. Likely 20thc.
F.S.#: 3, Transect A ST 1w, Stratum I ON OE
1 Glassware fragment, milk glass, molded, small shard, unid container, white
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, eroded. Alkaline southern smooth glazed
stoneware., American Stoneware body sherd
Recorder. E.A.Lindtveit Page 1 of 6

Context Count and Description
31CT295
F.S.#: 4, Transect E ST 2, Stratum I ON OE
1 Bottle fragment, glass, mold blown, mid to late 19thc type., bottle, amber, Molded Lettering
F.S.#: 5, Transect E ST 2e, Stratum I ON OE
TPQ: 1874
2 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1820-), Whiteware body sherd
1 Bottle fragment, glass, mold blown, Plate mold patent bottle (c1845-1920), small air vent
bumps (1874-1920)., pharmaceutical vial/bottle, aqua
1 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, molded, (1864-) small shard., bottle, colorless
2 wood fragment, charcoal
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, Southern smooth alkaline glaze (c1810-into
20thc), muddy olive green brown color. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware. Reddish brown
paste with grog temper, small thin sherd., American Stoneware body sherd
F.S.#: 6, Transect E ST 2n, Stratum I ON OE
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, Ironstone/White Granite body sherd
F.S.#: 7, Transect E ST 5, Stratum I ON OE
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, Southern smooth alkaline glaze (c1810-into
20thc), muddy olive green brown color. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware. Reddish brown
paste with grog temper.
F.S.#: 8, Transect E ST 5e, Stratum I ON OE
3 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, automatic machine, (1904-), bottle, colorless
F.S.#: 9, Transect E ST 5w, Stratum I ON OE
TPQ: 1864
1 Bottle fragment, glass, molded, bottle, aqua
1 Glassware fragment, milk glass, molded, unid tableware, white
Recorder. E.A.Lindtveit Page 2 of 6

Context Count and Description
1 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, molded, (1864-) possibly ABM (1904-), bottle, colorless
F.S.#: 10 Surface Collection 1 ON OE
TPQ: 1939
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, sponged (c1820-60s), chrome color
red (c1830-)., Whiteware body sherd sponge
7 Canning jar lid liner fragment, milk glass, molded, (1869-), lid liner, white
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, molded, c1900, 20thc type., American Stoneware body sherd
albany slip
1 Ceramic fragment, porcelain, molded, possibly figural., Hard Paste body sherd
3 Ceramic fragment, porcelain, press molded, Hard Paste body sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, porcelain, press molded, Hard Paste rim sherd molded decoration
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, spalled, no glaze, likely ironstone.,
Ironstone/White Granite body sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-) crazed and stained,
Ironstone/White Granite base sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-) enameled yellow line at rim,
Ironstone/White Granite rim sherd hand painted
10 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite body
sherd
5 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-) Plain and rounded style
(c1870s-1880s), Ironstone/White Granite rim sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, spalled. Engine turned bands of
marbleized variegated slip. (1790-1820) cup or small bowl., Creamware rim sherd slip
decorated
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-) crazed and stained molded
design with basketweave and rope motifs., Ironstone/White Granite body sherd
1 Mammal fragment, bone, small fragment. Butchered: cut mark.
7 Canning jar lid liner fragment, milk glass, molded, (1869-), lid liner, white
1 Bottle fragment, glass, molded, jar, colorless
2 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, automatic machine, likely ABM (1904-), bottle, colorless
Recorder. E.A.Lindtveit Page 3 of 6

Context Count and Description
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, lightweight beverage (1939-), bottle, beer, amber
1 Bottle fragment, glass, mold blown, likely canning jar (1869-), jar, aqua
2 Window fragment, glass, colorless
1 Strapping fragment, iron, rolled/sheet, approx 1" wide. Rivet hole. Corroded.
1 Unidentified Object fragment, lead, unidentified manufacture, small cap -like lead object,
approx 1.1cm diameter. Possibly part of lead seal?, 1.1cm L
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, American Southern alkaline sooth glazed
stoneware (c1810-into 20thc). Reddish brown paste with occasional grog, muddy olive -brown
alkaline glaze. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware. Rim/handle fragment with impressed
lettering on rim surface "...T R(?)..." (possiblly Trapp & Chandler?, Edgefield potters). Possible
handled bowl or pitcher. Handle is attached immediately undern rim, likely not crock for food
storage or fermenting., American Stoneware rim sherd impressed
2 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, American Southern alkaline sooth glazed
stoneware (c1810-into 20thc). Reddish brown paste with occasional grog, muddy olive -brown
alkaline glaze. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware., American Stoneware body sherd
Recorder. E.A.Lindtveit Page 4 of 6

Context Count and Description
31CT296
F.S.#: 11 Surface Collection 2 ON OE
TPQ: 1923
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, parison mold line (1904-). Possibly canning jar,
bottle, aqua
1 Bottle fragment, glass, molded, Possibly canning jar, bottle, aqua
1 Glassware fragment, milk glass, molded, likely machine molded cold cream jar. Late
19th/early 20thc type., jar, white
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, (1904-) H over A mark on base center (Hazel -
Atlas Glass Company, mark used c1923-1964). Jar code: "5 - K - 386" (Zanesville Plant #2).,
jar, colorless
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, (1904-) embossed letters on side: "(PER)FEC(T) /
(M)ASON" (Perfect Ball mason jars manufactured 1913-1922)., jar, colorless, Molded Lettering
1 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, Albany glaze interior and exterior (1804-,
espically popular late 19th and early 20thc). Large crock lid, possibly for fermentation or
pickling., American Stoneware rim sherd albany slip
4 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, (1904-), bottle, colorless
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-) Plain and rounded style
(c1870-1880s)., Ironstone/White Granite rim sherd
1 Bottle fragment, glass, automatic machine, (1904-) Continuous threaded lip (1919-)., jar,
colorless
3 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite base
sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite rim
sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite body
sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, Fugitive decalomania (1890-),
Ironstone/White Granite body sherd decalcomania
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, Printed makers mark on base
"...(KN)OWLES..." (Edwin Knowles China Company 1900-c1960)., Ironstone/White Granite
base sherd
2 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, flint blue color opaque glaze (1848-),
Whiteware body sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite rim
sherd transferprinted
2 Brick, bat fragment, ceramic
Recorder. E.A.Lindtveit Page 5 of 6

Context Count and Description
6 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite body
sherd
31CT297
F.S.#: 12 Surface Collection 3 ON OE
TPQ: 1869
2 Ceramic fragment, stoneware, wheel thrown, Southern smooth alkaline glaze (c1810-into
20thc), muddy olive green brown color. Possible Edgefield Pottery stoneware. Reddish brown
paste with grog temper, small thin sherd., American Stoneware body sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, Impressed repetitive late period shell
edge (c1841-c1857). Mid 19thc type., Ironstone/White Granite rim sherd shell edged
3 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite body
sherd
1 Ceramic fragment, refined earthenware, press molded, (1842-), Ironstone/White Granite body
sherd
2 Canning jar lid liner fragment, milk glass, molded, (1869-), lid liner, white
1 Bottle fragment, soda lime glass, molded, (1864-) Possibly ABM (1904-)., bottle, colorless
Recorder: E.A.Lindtveit Page 6 of 6

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORMS
Appendix B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORMS
m

NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM VIII
Office of State Archaeology/Division of Archives & History
1. STATE SITE NUMBER:
2. SITENESSEL NAME(S):
3. OTHER SITE NUMBER:
4. INSTITUTION ASSIGNING: Stantec
5. PROJECT SITE NUMBER:
6. SITE COMPONENT: 2 - Historic
CODE: 135
1902-01
7. SITE REMAINS: A - No Above -ground Remains
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
8. COUNTY: CT
9. QUAD MAP: Maiden 1970
10. BODY OF WATER:
11. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 1 - UTM
12. MAP ZONE: 2 - 17
13. MAP EASTING: 811339
14: RECORDED W/ GPS?: 1 - Yes
MAP CODE: R13
MAP UNITS: 2 -Feet
MAP DATUM: 2 - NAD 27
MAP NORTHING: 353557
GPS DATA POST -PROCESSED?: 1 - Yes
***ATTACH USGS MAP AND ANYADDITIONAL SITE MAPS* **
15. DATE RECORDED: 12/4/22 RECORDED BY: Ashley Bocan
16. RESULT OF COMPLIANCE PROJECT: 1 - Yes PROJECT NAME: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of
an Approximately I I8.17-Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed CLT10 Maidens Data Center in
Catawba County, North Carolina
17. PROJECT TRACKING NUMBER(S):
18. CODING DATE: 1/10/23
19. CURATION FACILITY:
1. Stantec (135)
2. OSA-109 E. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601
3.
21. ARTIFACT INVENTORY ATTACHED:
22. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE #'S:
23. RECOMMENDATIONS:
CODED BY: Donald Sadler
20. ACCESSION NUMBER:
1.
2.
3.
1 -Yes
1 - No Further Work
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
24. GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION: 6 - 1st Terrace
25. ELEVATION/DEPTH: 994 FT. AMSL
ORDER:
1.
2.
3.

Site #: 31
26. SLOPE PERCENT: LOW 0 % HIGH 6 % SLOPE FACE DIRECTION: 1 - North
27. SOILBOTTOM COMPOSITION: 9 - Sandy Clay
28. NRCS SOIL TYPE CODE: LcB SOIL SERIES NAME: Llyod loam
29. MODERN VEGETATION: 9 - Disturbed or Upturned
30. DISTANCE TO WATER/FROM SHORE: 187 (Meters)
31. NEAREST PERMANENT WATER TYPE: 2 - River, Creek, Stream
32. DRAINAGE BASIN: 3 - Catawba
33. SITE SIZE 5 - 601-5000 sq. m./719-5980 sq. yds.
34. GROUND VISIBILITY: LOW 0 % GROUND VISIBILITY: HIGH 0 %
35. UNDERWATER VISIBILITY (FEET):
36. SITE CONDITION: 0 - Unknown 26 - Pasture
37. PERCENT DESTROYED:
0 - Unknown DATE DESTROYED:
38. DESTRUCTION CAUSES:
3 - Land Clearing
INVESTIGATIONS
39. COLLECTION MADE:
2 - No
40. COLLECTION STRATEGY:
41. AREA COVERED IN CONTROLLED
COLLECTION: (SQ. M.)
42. TEST MADE:
1 -Yes
43. TESTING METHODS:
3 - Shovel Test
44. EXCAVATION DATE:
45. INSTITUTION EXCAVATING:
PREHISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
45. CULTURAL COMPONENT(S):
46. SITE FUNCTION(S):
47. MIDDEN:
48. LITHICS: ❑ 1 Hafted Bifaces/Projectile Pts
❑ 2 Bifaces
❑ 3 Unifacial Tools
❑ 4 Other Unifacial Tools
❑ 5 Cores
49. TOOL TYPES AND FREOUENCIES: #
❑ 6 Primary Debitage
❑ 7 Secondary Debitage
❑ 8 Tertiary Debitage
❑ 9 Ground Or Pecked Stone
❑ 10 Shatter
❑ 99 Other
❑
1 - Clovis
❑
31 - PPt. (Triangular)
❑
2 - Hardaway Blade
❑
32 - PPt. Fra . Notched/Stemmed
❑
3 - Hardaway -Dalton
❑
33 - PPt. Fra (Triangular)
4 - Hardaway Side -Notched
H
34 - PPt. Fra . Indeterminate
5 - Palmer Corner Notched
U
35 - End Scraper (Type I
6 - Kirk Corner -Notched
36 - End Scraper (Type II
7 - St. Albans Side Notched
37 - End Scraper (Type III
8 - LeCroy Bifurcated Stem
38 - Side Scraper (Type I
9 - Kanawha Stemmed
39 - Side Scraper (Type II
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 2

Site #: 31
❑
10 - Kirk Serrated
L
40 - Side Scraper (Type III)
❑
11 - Kirk Stemmed
❑
41 - Pointed Scraper
❑
12 - Stanly Stemmed
❑
42 - Oval Scraper
❑
13 - Morrow Mtn. I Stemmed
❑
43 - Pisgah Triangular
❑
14 - Morrow Mtn. II Stemmed
❑
44 - Haywood Triangular
❑
15 - Guilford Lanceolate
45 - Garden Creek Triangular
❑
16 - Halifax Side -Notched
46 - Co ena Triangular
❑
17 - Savannah River Stemmed
47 - Connestee Triangular
❑
18 - Sm. Savannah R. Stemmed
❑
48 - Madison
❑
19 - Gypsy Stemmed
❑
49 - South Appalachian Pentagonal
❑
20 - Swannanoa Stemmed
❑
50 - Transylvania Triangular
❑
21 - Badin Crude Triangular
❑
51 - Otarre
❑
22 - Yadkin Large Triangular
❑
52 - Plott
❑
23 - Roanoke Large Triangular
❑
53 - Big Sand
❑
24 - Uwharrie Triangular
❑
54 - MacCorkle
25 - Caraway Triangular
❑
55 - Bradley Spike
LJ
26 - Clarksville Small Triangular
L
56 - Swansboro
❑
27 - Pee Dee Pentagonal
❑
57 - Yadkin -Eared
❑
28 - Randolph Stemmed
❑
58 - Piscataway
❑
29 - PPt. Notched
❑
59 - Roanoke Small Triangular
❑
30 - PPt. Stemmed
❑
60 - Swansboro
99 - Other
50. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
❑ 1 Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 2 Non -Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 3 Antler
❑ 4 Unworked Marine/River Shell
❑ 5 Worked Marine/River Shell
❑ 6 Turtle Shell
❑ 7 C-14 Sample(s)
❑ 8 Pollen Sample(s)
PREHISTORIC CERAMICS:
51. CERAMIC TEMPER:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
❑
9
Phytolith Sample(s)
❑
10
T-L Sample(S)
❑
11
Sediment Sample(s)
❑
12
Wood
❑
13
Fiber
❑
14
Fabric
❑
15
Fire -Cracked Rock
❑
99
Other
52. SURFACE TREATMENT:
53. TYPE NAME:
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
9.
10.
10.
HISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
54. PERIOD OF OCCUPATION BEGIN:
55. REFINED DATE FROM:
56. HISTORIC AFFILIATION:
57. HISTORIC DEFINITION:
58. SITE TYPE/FEATURE:
PERIOD OF OCCUPATION END:
REFINED DATE TO:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 3

Site #: 31
(NOTE: IF RESPONSE 58 IS #65, WATER VESSEL, COMPLETE ITEMS 59 — 76,
AND APPLICABLE ITEMS FROM HISTORIC ARTIFA CTS)
VESSEL INFORMATION
59. DATA SOURCE:
60. PRIMARY HULL CONSTRUCTION: DETAIL:
61. HULL FASTENINGS: DETAIL:
62. HULL DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
63. WRECKAGE DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
64. ESTIMATED ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH:
HOW DETERMINED:
65. ESTIMATE OF ORIGINAL VESSEL REMAINING: %
66. MEANS OF PROPULSION: PRIMARY:
SECONDARY: DETAILS:
67. SAIL POWERED: NUMBER OF MASTS:
OBSERVABLE REMAINS:
SAIL CONFIGURATION
(IF POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE):
DETAILS:
68. ENGINE POWERED: MECHANISM:
DETAILS:
ENGINE NUMBER:
TYPE:
BOILER NUMBER:
TYPE:
69. ALTERNATE MEANS OF POWER (IF ANY):
DETAILS:
70. CAUSE OF LOSS: DETAILS:
71. COUNTRY OF CONSTRUCTION (IF KNOWN):
72. ARTIFACT CATEGORIES OBSERVED: ❑ Cargo
❑ Ordnance
❑ Ship's Equipment
❑ Personal Effects
❑ Other
73. PURPOSE OF CRAFT:
DETAILS:
74. TYPE OF VESSEL:
75. VESSEL DESCRIPTION:
76. VISIT HISTORY (DATE, ORGANIZATION, PURPOSE, RESULTS):
am HISTORIC ARTIFACTS
FUEL:
FEET
77. ACTIVITIES GROUP: ❑ 1 - Construction Tools ❑ 6 - Storage Items
❑ 2 - Farm Tools ❑ 7 - Ethnobotanical
❑ 3 - Toys ❑ 8 - Associated With Stable Or Barn
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 4

Site #: 31
❑ 4 - Fishing Gear
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Colonial -Indian Pottery
78. AGRICULTURE:
❑ 1 - Farm Tool
❑ 3 - Fencing Material
❑ 2 - Assoc. w/ Stable/Barn
❑ 9 - Other
79. ARCHITECTURAL GROUP:
❑ 1 - Window Glass
❑ 4 - Construction Hardware
❑ 2 - Nails
❑ 5 - Door Lock Parts
❑ 3 - Spikes
❑ 9 - Other
80. ARMS GROUP:
❑ 1 - Musket Balls, Shot, Sprue
❑ 3 - Gun Parts, Bullet Molds
❑ 2 - Gun Flints, Gunspalls
❑ 9 - Other
81. CLOTHING GROUP:
❑ 1 - Buckles
❑ 6 - Hook & Eye Fasteners
❑ 2 - Thimbles
❑ 7 - Bale Seals
❑ 3 - Buttons
❑ 8 - Glass Beads
❑ 4 - Scissors
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Straight Pins
82. HISTORIC MISCELLANEOUS:
❑ 1 - Bone Fragment
❑ 4 - Silversmithing Debris
❑ 2 - Furniture Hardware
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Button Manufacturing Blanks
83. KITCHEN GROUP:
® 1 - Ceramics
® 6 - Glassware
❑ 2 - Wine Bottle
❑ 7 - Tableware
❑ 3 - Case Bottle
❑ 8 - Kitchenware
❑ 4 - Tumbler
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Pharmaceutical Bottle
84. MILITARY OBJECTS:
❑ 1 - Swords
❑ 4 - Artillery Shot & Shell
❑ 2 - Insignia
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Bayonets
85. PERSONAL ITEMS:
❑ 1 - Coins
❑ 3 - Personal Items
❑ 2 - Keys
❑ 9 - Other
86. PIPES:
❑ 1 - Tobacco Pipe
❑ 3 - Pipe Stems
❑ 2 - Stub -Stemmed Pipes
❑ 9 - Other
87. TEMPORALLY DIAGNOSTIC ARTIFACTS:
COMMENTS
88. OWNER/TENANT INFORMATION: Unknown
89. DIRECTIONS TO SITE: The site is located northwest from Haynes Drive and east from Clark Creek in an open grass field
surrounded by light woodland. Site is located on Parcel Number xxxxxxxxxxx / Pin ID: xxxxxxxx
90. RESEARCH POTENTIAL: No Further Work Required
91. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommendations: Site 1902-01 represents a low density nineteenth to
twentieth-century artifact scatter centered around architectural push piles of former structures. No architectural material was
present in the assemblage. The architectural compound was first depicted on a 1951 historic aerial. The site appears to be a
small scatter of general debris and retains little to no research potential. Stantec recommends Site 1902-01 as not eligible for
NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No
further archaeological work is recommended.
92. EXCAVATION RESULTS:
93. EXPLANATION OF IMPACTS: The site has been prevously bulldozed and push piles of architectural debris are evident.
Natural impacts to the site primarily include erosion and bioturbation from fauna in the field.
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 5

Site #: 31
94. TESTING RESULTS: Shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals. Four shovel tests were positive for
cultural material. In total, 10 historic artifacts were recovered. The assemblege was entirely comprised of domestic glassware
and ceramic.
95. FEATURE DESCRIPTION:
96. OTHER IMPORTANT ARTIFACT TYPES:
97. HISTORIC CERAMIC TYPES:
98. HISTORIC SITE DESCRIPTION:
99. COMMENTS:
100 -107: OFFICE OF STATE ARCHAEOLOGY USE ONLY
100. NATIONAL REGISTER STATUS:
101. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERION:
102. DATE ON NATIONAL REGISTER:
103. TYPE OF FORM:
104. RECORDER STATUS:
105. FORM RELIABILITY:
106. LOCATIONAL RELIABILITY:
107. FORM DATA CHECKED BY: DATE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 6

rr q1 r ll' — %tom f/ • I .�/,i am
��,•1 _ -ems f -
1902-02 1902-03
7.
' i - ;
a•
••
� •fib � ! '� � _ ��
_ � �.'
Ilk
p 1902-05
4 1 I ��s t i i'�► ! ��
41 �� /� J� • �— Jfq� �\
It
hww�V z
High
~} V •
— f
1 1~ $ tr i
0 1,000 2,000 N
O Archaeological Site I Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by MGS on 2023-01-05
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-05
Clienl/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Stantec, INC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Site Location Map
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM VIII
Office of State Archaeology/Division of Archives & History
1. STATE SITE NUMBER:
2. SITENESSEL NAME(S):
3. OTHER SITE NUMBER:
4. INSTITUTION ASSIGNING: Stantec
5. PROJECT SITE NUMBER:
6. SITE COMPONENT: 2 - Historic
CODE: 135
1902-02
7. SITE REMAINS: A - No Above -ground Remains
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
8. COUNTY: CT
9. QUAD MAP: Maiden 1970
10. BODY OF WATER:
11. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 1 - UTM
12. MAP ZONE: 2 - 17
13. MAP EASTING: 811341
14: RECORDED W/ GPS?: 1 - Yes
MAP CODE: R13
MAP UNITS: 2 -Feet
MAP DATUM: 2 - NAD 27
MAP NORTHING: 353551
GPS DATA POST -PROCESSED?: 1 - Yes
***ATTACH USGS MAP AND ANYADDITIONAL SITE MAPS* * *
15. DATE RECORDED: 12/4/22 RECORDED BY: Ashley Bocan
16. RESULT OF COMPLIANCE PROJECT: 1 - Yes PROJECT NAME: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of
an Approximately I I8.17-Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed CLT10 Maidens Data Center in
Catawba County, North Carolina
17. PROJECT TRACKING NUMBER(S):
18. CODING DATE: 1/10/23
19. CURATION FACILITY:
1. Stantec (135)
2. OSA-109 E. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601
3.
21. ARTIFACT INVENTORY ATTACHED:
22. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE #'S:
23. RECOMMENDATIONS:
CODED BY: Donald Sadler
20. ACCESSION NUMBER:
1.
2.
3.
1 -Yes
1 - No Further Work
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
24. GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION: 6 - 1st Terrace
25. ELEVATION/DEPTH: 881 FT. AMSL
ORDER:
1.
2.
3.

Site #: 31
26. SLOPE PERCENT: LOW 0 % HIGH 6 % SLOPE FACE DIRECTION: 2 - Northeast
27. SOILBOTTOM COMPOSITION: 9 - Sandy Clay
28. NRCS SOIL TYPE CODE: LcB SOIL SERIES NAME: Llyod loam
29. MODERN VEGETATION: 3 - Pasture
30. DISTANCE TO WATER/FROM SHORE: 73 (Meters)
31. NEAREST PERMANENT WATER TYPE: 2 - River, Creek, Stream
32. DRAINAGE BASIN: 3 - Catawba
33. SITE SIZE 5 - 601-5000 sq. m./719-5980 sq. yds.
34. GROUND VISIBILITY: LOW 20 % GROUND VISIBILITY: HIGH 40 %
35. UNDERWATER VISIBILITY (FEET):
36. SITE CONDITION: 0 - Unknown 26 - Pasture
37. PERCENT DESTROYED: 0 - Unknown DATE DESTROYED:
38. DESTRUCTION CAUSES: 3 - Land Clearing
39. COLLECTION MADE: 1 -Yes
40. COLLECTION STRATEGY: 4 - Total (all visible)
41. AREA COVERED IN CONTROLLED COLLECTION: 2500 (SQ. M.)
42. TEST MADE: 1 -Yes
43. TESTING METHODS: 3 - Shovel Test
44. EXCAVATION DATE: 45. INSTITUTION EXCAVATING:
PREHISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
45. CULTURAL COMPONENT(S):
46. SITE FUNCTION(S):
47. MIDDEN:
48. LITHICS: ❑ 1 Hafted Bifaces/Projectile Pts
❑ 2 Bifaces
❑ 3 Unifacial Tools
❑ 4 Other Unifacial Tools
❑ 5 Cores
49. TOOL TYPES AND FREOUENCIES: #
❑ 6 Primary Debitage
❑ 7 Secondary Debitage
❑ 8 Tertiary Debitage
❑ 9 Ground Or Pecked Stone
❑ 10 Shatter
❑ 99 Other
❑
1 - Clovis
❑
31 - PPt. (Triangular)
❑
2 - Hardaway Blade
❑
32 - PPt. Fra . Notched/Stemmed
❑
3 - Hardaway -Dalton
❑
33 - PPt. Fra (Triangular)
4 - Hardaway Side -Notched
H
34 - PPt. Fra . Indeterminate
5 - Palmer Corner Notched
U
35 - End Scraper (Type I
6 - Kirk Corner -Notched
36 - End Scraper (Type II
7 - St. Albans Side Notched
37 - End Scraper (Type III
8 - LeCroy Bifurcated Stem
38 - Side Scraper (Type I
9 - Kanawha Stemmed
39 - Side Scraper (Type II
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 2

Site #: 31
❑
10 - Kirk Serrated
L
40 - Side Scraper (Type III)
❑
11 - Kirk Stemmed
❑
41 - Pointed Scraper
❑
12 - Stanly Stemmed
❑
42 - Oval Scraper
❑
13 - Morrow Mtn. I Stemmed
❑
43 - Pisgah Triangular
❑
14 - Morrow Mtn. II Stemmed
❑
44 - Haywood Triangular
❑
15 - Guilford Lanceolate
45 - Garden Creek Triangular
❑
16 - Halifax Side -Notched
46 - Co ena Triangular
❑
17 - Savannah River Stemmed
47 - Connestee Triangular
❑
18 - Sm. Savannah R. Stemmed
❑
48 - Madison
❑
19 - Gypsy Stemmed
❑
49 - South Appalachian Pentagonal
❑
20 - Swannanoa Stemmed
❑
50 - Transylvania Triangular
❑
21 - Badin Crude Triangular
❑
51 - Otarre
❑
22 - Yadkin Large Triangular
❑
52 - Plott
❑
23 - Roanoke Large Triangular
❑
53 - Big Sand
❑
24 - Uwharrie Triangular
❑
54 - MacCorkle
25 - Caraway Triangular
❑
55 - Bradley Spike
LJ
26 - Clarksville Small Triangular
L
56 - Swansboro
❑
27 - Pee Dee Pentagonal
❑
57 - Yadkin -Eared
❑
28 - Randolph Stemmed
❑
58 - Piscataway
❑
29 - PPt. Notched
❑
59 - Roanoke Small Triangular
❑
30 - PPt. Stemmed
❑
60 - Swansboro
99 - Other
50. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
❑ 1 Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 2 Non -Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 3 Antler
❑ 4 Unworked Marine/River Shell
❑ 5 Worked Marine/River Shell
❑ 6 Turtle Shell
❑ 7 C-14 Sample(s)
❑ 8 Pollen Sample(s)
PREHISTORIC CERAMICS:
51. CERAMIC TEMPER:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
❑
9
Phytolith Sample(s)
❑
10
T-L Sample(S)
❑
11
Sediment Sample(s)
❑
12
Wood
❑
13
Fiber
❑
14
Fabric
❑
15
Fire -Cracked Rock
❑
99
Other
52. SURFACE TREATMENT:
53. TYPE NAME:
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
9.
10.
10.
HISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
54. PERIOD OF OCCUPATION BEGIN:
55. REFINED DATE FROM:
56. HISTORIC AFFILIATION:
57. HISTORIC DEFINITION:
58. SITE TYPE/FEATURE:
PERIOD OF OCCUPATION END:
REFINED DATE TO:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 3

Site #: 31
(NOTE: IF RESPONSE 58 IS #65, WATER VESSEL, COMPLETE ITEMS 59 — 76,
AND APPLICABLE ITEMS FROM HISTORIC ARTIFACTS)
VESSEL INFORMATION
59. DATA SOURCE:
60. PRIMARY HULL CONSTRUCTION: DETAIL:
61. HULL FASTENINGS: DETAIL:
62. HULL DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
63. WRECKAGE DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
64. ESTIMATED ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH:
HOW DETERMINED:
65. ESTIMATE OF ORIGINAL VESSEL REMAINING: %
66. MEANS OF PROPULSION: PRIMARY:
SECONDARY: DETAILS:
67. SAIL POWERED: NUMBER OF MASTS:
OBSERVABLE REMAINS:
SAIL CONFIGURATION
(IF POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE):
DETAILS:
68. ENGINE POWERED: MECHANISM:
DETAILS:
ENGINE NUMBER:
TYPE:
BOILER NUMBER:
TYPE:
69. ALTERNATE MEANS OF POWER (IF ANY):
DETAILS:
70. CAUSE OF LOSS: DETAILS:
71. COUNTRY OF CONSTRUCTION (IF KNOWN):
72. ARTIFACT CATEGORIES OBSERVED: ❑ Cargo
❑ Ordnance
❑ Ship's Equipment
❑ Personal Effects
❑ Other
73. PURPOSE OF CRAFT:
DETAILS:
74. TYPE OF VESSEL:
75. VESSEL DESCRIPTION:
76. VISIT HISTORY (DATE, ORGANIZATION, PURPOSE, RESULTS):
am HISTORIC ARTIFACTS
FUEL:
FEET
77. ACTIVITIES GROUP: ❑ 1 - Construction Tools ❑ 6 - Storage Items
❑ 2 - Farm Tools ❑ 7 - Ethnobotanical
❑ 3 - Toys ❑ 8 - Associated With Stable Or Barn
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 4

Site #: 31
78. AGRICULTURE:
79. ARCHITECTURAL GROUP:
80. ARMS GROUP:
81. CLOTHING GROUP:
82. HISTORIC MISCELLANEOUS:
83. KITCHEN GROUP:
84. MILITARY OBJECTS:
85. PERSONAL ITEMS:
86. PIPES:
❑ 4 - Fishing Gear
❑ 5 - Colonial -Indian Pottery
❑ 1 - Farm Tool
❑ 2 - Assoc. w/ Stable/Barn
❑ 1 - Window Glass
❑ 2 - Nails
❑ 3 - Spikes
❑ 1 - Musket Balls, Shot, Sprue
❑ 2 - Gun Flints, Gunspalls
❑ 1 - Buckles
❑ 2 - Thimbles
❑ 3 - Buttons
❑ 4 - Scissors
❑ 5 - Straight Pins
❑ 1 - Bone Fragment
❑ 2 - Furniture Hardware
❑ 3 - Button Manufacturing Blanks
® 1 - Ceramics
❑ 2 - Wine Bottle
❑ 3 - Case Bottle
❑ 4 - Tumbler
❑ 5 - Pharmaceutical Bottle
❑ 1 - Swords
❑ 2 - Insignia
❑ 3 - Bayonets
❑ 1 - Coins
❑ 2 - Keys
❑ 1 - Tobacco Pipe
❑ 2 - Stub -Stemmed Pipes
87. TEMPORALLY DIAGNOSTIC ARTIFACTS:
COMMENTS
88. OWNER/TENANT INFORMATION: Unknown
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Fencing Material
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 4 - Construction Hardware
❑ 5 - Door Lock Parts
® 9 - Other unidentified metal
❑ 3 - Gun Parts, Bullet Molds
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 6 - Hook & Eye Fasteners
❑ 7 - Bale Seals
❑ 8 - Glass Beads
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 4 - Silversmithing Debris
® 9 - Other charcoal
® 6 - Glassware
❑ 7 - Tableware
❑ 8 - Kitchenware
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 4 - Artillery Shot & Shell
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Personal Items
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Pipe Stems
❑ 9 - Other
89. DIRECTIONS TO SITE: The site is located northwest from Haynes Drive in an open field surrounded by light woodland.
Site is located on Parcel Number xxxxxxxxxxx / Pin ID: xxxxxxxx
90. RESEARCH POTENTIAL: No Further Work Required
91. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Site 1902-02 represents a low density nineteenth to twentieth-century
artifact scatter centered around push piles of architectural debris suggesting former farmstead structures. No architectural
material was present in the assemblage. The architectural compound was first depicted on a 1951 historic aerial. The site
appears to be a small scatter of general debris and retains little to no research potential. Stantec recommends Site 1902-02 as
not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of
this resource. No further archaeological work is recommended.
92. EXCAVATION RESULTS:
93. EXPLANATION OF IMPACTS: The site has been prevously cleared and push piles of architectural debris are evident.
Natural impacts to the site primarily include erosion and bioturbation from fauna in the field.
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 5

Site #: 31
94. TESTING RESULTS: Shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals. Six shovel tests were positive for
cultural material. Artifacts were also collected during surface inspection of exposed subsoil areas. In total, 62 historic artifacts
were recovered. The assemblege was predominately comprised of domestic glassware and ceramic.
95. FEATURE DESCRIPTION:
96. OTHER IMPORTANT ARTIFACT TYPES:
97. HISTORIC CERAMIC TYPES:
98. HISTORIC SITE DESCRIPTION:
99. COMMENTS:
100 -107: OFFICE OF STATE ARCHAEOLOGY USE ONLY
100. NATIONAL REGISTER STATUS:
101. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERION:
102. DATE ON NATIONAL REGISTER:
103. TYPE OF FORM:
104. RECORDER STATUS:
105. FORM RELIABILITY:
106. LOCATIONAL RELIABILITY:
107. FORM DATA CHECKED BY: DATE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 6

rr q1 r ll' — %tom f/ • I .�/,i am
��,•1 _ -ems f -
1902-02 1902-03
7.
' i - ;
a•
••
� •fib � ! '� � _ ��
_ � �.'
Ilk
p 1902-05
4 1 I ��s t i i'�► ! ��
41 �� /� J� • �— Jfq� �\
It
hww�V z
High
~} V •
— f
1 1~ $ tr i
0 1,000 2,000 N
O Archaeological Site I Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by MGS on 2023-01-05
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-05
Clienl/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Stantec, INC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Site Location Map
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM VIII
Office of State Archaeology/Division of Archives & History
1. STATE SITE NUMBER:
2. SITENESSEL NAME(S):
3. OTHER SITE NUMBER:
4. INSTITUTION ASSIGNING: Stantec
5. PROJECT SITE NUMBER:
6. SITE COMPONENT: 2 - Historic
CODE: 135
1902-03
7. SITE REMAINS: A - No Above -ground Remains
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
8. COUNTY: CT
9. QUAD MAP: Maiden 1970
10. BODY OF WATER:
11. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 1 - UTM
12. MAP ZONE: 2 - 17
13. MAP EASTING: 811327
14: RECORDED W/ GPS?: 1 - Yes
MAP CODE: R13
MAP UNITS: 2 -Feet
MAP DATUM: 2 - NAD 27
MAP NORTHING: 353551
GPS DATA POST -PROCESSED?: 1 - Yes
***ATTACH USGS MAP AND ANYADDITIONAL SITE MAPS* * *
15. DATE RECORDED: 12/14/22 RECORDED BY: Ashley Bocan
16. RESULT OF COMPLIANCE PROJECT: 1 - Yes PROJECT NAME: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of
an Approximately I I8.17-Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed CLT10 Maidens Data Center in
Catawba County, North Carolina
17. PROJECT TRACKING NUMBER(S):
18. CODING DATE: 1/10/23
19. CURATION FACILITY:
1. Stantec (135)
2. OSA-109 E. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601
3.
21. ARTIFACT INVENTORY ATTACHED:
22. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE #'S:
23. RECOMMENDATIONS:
CODED BY: Donald Sadler
20. ACCESSION NUMBER:
1.
2.
3.
1 -Yes
1 - No Further Work
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
24. GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION: 6 - 1st Terrace
25. ELEVATION/DEPTH: 911 FT. AMSL
ORDER:
1.
2.
3.

Site #: 31
26. SLOPE PERCENT: LOW 0 % HIGH 6 % SLOPE FACE DIRECTION: 5 - South
27. SOILBOTTOM COMPOSITION: 9 - Sandy Clay
28. NRCS SOIL TYPE CODE: LcB SOIL SERIES NAME: Llyod loam
29. MODERN VEGETATION: 5 - Scrub Pine Clearing
30. DISTANCE TO WATER/FROM SHORE: 345 (Meters)
31. NEAREST PERMANENT WATER TYPE: 2 - River, Creek, Stream
32. DRAINAGE BASIN: 3 - Catawba
33. SITE SIZE 4 - 101-600 sq. m./121-718 sq. yds.
34. GROUND VISIBILITY: LOW 50 % GROUND VISIBILITY: HIGH 70 %
35. UNDERWATER VISIBILITY (FEET):
36. SITE CONDITION: 3 - Heavy Erosion 27 - Cultivated
37. PERCENT DESTROYED: 4 - 51% - 75% DATE DESTROYED:
38. DESTRUCTION CAUSES: 3 - Land Clearing 2 - Minor Earth Moving/Dredging
INVESTIGATIONS
39. COLLECTION MADE: 1 -Yes
40. COLLECTION STRATEGY: 4 - Total (all visible)
41. AREA COVERED IN CONTROLLED COLLECTION: 250 (SQ. M.)
42. TEST MADE: 1 -Yes
43. TESTING METHODS: 3 - Shovel Test just one
44. EXCAVATION DATE: 45. INSTITUTION EXCAVATING:
I am PREHISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
45. CULTURAL COMPONENT(S):
46. SITE FUNCTION(S):
47. MIDDEN:
48. LITHICS: ❑ 1 Hafted Bifaces/Projectile Pts
❑ 2 Bifaces
❑ 3 Unifacial Tools
❑ 4 Other Unifacial Tools
❑ 5 Cores
49. TOOL TYPES AND FREOUENCIES: #
❑ 6 Primary Debitage
❑ 7 Secondary Debitage
❑ 8 Tertiary Debitage
❑ 9 Ground Or Pecked Stone
❑ 10 Shatter
❑ 99 Other
❑
1 - Clovis
❑
31 - PPt. (Triangular)
❑
2 - Hardaway Blade
❑
32 - PPt. Fra . Notched/Stemmed
❑
3 - Hardaway -Dalton
❑
33 - PPt. Fra (Triangular)
4 - Hardaway Side -Notched
H
34 - PPt. Fra . Indeterminate
5 - Palmer Corner Notched
LJ
35 - End Scraper (Type I
6 - Kirk Corner -Notched
36 - End Scraper (Type II
7 - St. Albans Side Notched
37 - End Scraper (Type III
8 - LeCroy Bifurcated Stem
38 - Side Scraper (Type I)
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 2

Site #: 31
❑
9 - Kanawha Stemmed
❑
39 - Side Scraper (Type II)
❑
10 - Kirk Serrated
❑
40 - Side Scraper (Type III)
❑
11 - Kirk Stemmed
❑
41 - Pointed Scraper
❑
12 - Stanly Stemmed
❑
42 - Oval Scraper
❑
13 - Morrow Mtn. I Stemmed
❑
43 - Pisgah Triangular
❑
14 - Morrow Mtn. II Stemmed
44 - Haywood Triangular
❑
15 - Guilford Lanceolate
45 - Garden Creek Triangular
❑
16 - Halifax Side -Notched
0
46 - Co ena Triangular
❑
17 - Savannah River Stemmed
❑
47 - Connestee Triangular
❑
18 - Sm. Savannah R. Stemmed
❑
48 - Madison
❑
19 - Gypsy Stemmed
❑
49 - South Appalachian Pentagonal
❑
20 - Swannanoa Stemmed
❑
50 - Transylvania Triangular
❑
21 - Badin Crude Triangular
❑
51 - Otarre
❑
22 - Yadkin Large Triangular
❑
52 - Plott
❑
23 - Roanoke Large Triangular
❑
53 - Big Sand
24 - Uwharrie Triangular
❑
54 - MacCorkle
Lj
25 - Caraway Triangular
L
55 - Bradley Spike
❑
26 - Clarksville Small Triangular
❑
56 - Swansboro
❑
27 - Pee Dee Pentagonal
❑
57 - Yadkin -Eared
❑
28 - Randol h Stemmed
❑
58 - Piscataway
❑
29 - PPt.(Notched)
❑
59 - Roanoke Small Triangular
30 - PPt. Stemmed
60 - Swansboro
99 - Other
50. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
❑ 1 Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 2 Non -Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 3 Antler
❑ 4 Unworked Marine/River Shell
❑ 5 Worked Marine/River Shell
❑ 6 Turtle Shell
❑ 7 C-14 Sample(s)
❑ 8 Pollen Sample(s)
PREHISTORIC CERAMICS:
51. CERAMIC TEMPER:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
❑
9
Phytolith Sample(s)
❑
10
T-L Sample(S)
❑
11
Sediment Sample(s)
❑
12
Wood
❑
13
Fiber
❑
14
Fabric
❑
15
Fire -Cracked Rock
❑
99
Other
52. SURFACE TREATMENT:
53. TYPE NAME:
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
9.
10.
10.
HISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
54. PERIOD OF OCCUPATION BEGIN:
55. REFINED DATE FROM:
56. HISTORIC AFFILIATION:
57. HISTORIC DEFINITION:
58. SITE TYPE/FEATURE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH
PERIOD OF OCCUPATION END:
REFINED DATE TO:
Page 3

Site #: 31
(NOTE: IF RESPONSE 58 IS #65, WATER VESSEL, COMPLETE ITEMS 59 — 76,
AND APPLICABLE ITEMS FROM HISTORIC ARTIFACTS)
VESSEL INFORMATION
59. DATA SOURCE:
60. PRIMARY HULL CONSTRUCTION: DETAIL:
61. HULL FASTENINGS: DETAIL:
62. HULL DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
63. WRECKAGE DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
64. ESTIMATED ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH:
HOW DETERMINED:
65. ESTIMATE OF ORIGINAL VESSEL REMAINING: %
66. MEANS OF PROPULSION: PRIMARY: SECONDARY: DETAILS:
67. SAIL POWERED: NUMBER OF MASTS: OBSERVABLE REMAINS:
SAIL CONFIGURATION (IF POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE):
DETAILS:
68. ENGINE POWERED: MECHANISM: DETAILS:
ENGINE NUMBER: TYPE:
BOILER NUMBER: TYPE:
69. ALTERNATE MEANS OF POWER (IF ANY): DETAILS:
70. CAUSE OF LOSS: DETAILS:
71. COUNTRY OF CONSTRUCTION (IF KNOWN):
72. ARTIFACT CATEGORIES OBSERVED: ❑ Cargo
❑ Ordnance
❑ Ship's Equipment
❑ Personal Effects
❑ Other
73. PURPOSE OF CRAFT: DETAILS:
74. TYPE OF VESSEL:
75. VESSEL DESCRIPTION:
76. VISIT HISTORY (DATE, ORGANIZATION, PURPOSE, RESULTS):
HISTORIC ARTIFACTS
77. ACTIVITIES GROUP:
FEET DEPTH: FEET
FUEL:
❑ I - Construction Tools ❑ 6 - Storage Items
❑ 2 - Farm Tools ❑ 7 - Ethnobotanical
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form V111 Page 4

Site #: 31
❑ 3 -Toys
❑ 8 - Associated With Stable Or Barn
❑ 4 - Fishing Gear
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Colonial -Indian Pottery
78. AGRICULTURE:
❑ 1 - Farm Tool
❑ 3 - Fencing Material
❑ 2 - Assoc. w/ Stable/Barn
❑ 9 - Other
79. ARCHITECTURAL GROUP:
❑ 1 - Window Glass
❑ 4 - Construction Hardware
❑ 2 - Nails
❑ 5 - Door Lock Parts
❑ 3 - Spikes
❑ 9 - Other ric
80. ARMS GROUP:
❑ 1 - Musket Balls, Shot, Sprue
❑ 3 - Gun Parts, Bullet Molds
❑ 2 - Gun Flints, Gunspalls
❑ 9 - Other
81. CLOTHING GROUP:
❑ 1 - Buckles
❑ 6 - Hook & Eye Fasteners
❑ 2 - Thimbles
❑ 7 - Bale Seals
❑ 3 - Buttons
❑ 8 - Glass Beads
❑ 4 - Scissors
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Straight Pins
82. HISTORIC MISCELLANEOUS:
❑ 1 - Bone Fragment
❑ 4 - Silversmithing Debris
❑ 2 - Furniture Hardware
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Button Manufacturing Blanks
83. KITCHEN GROUP:
® 1 - Ceramics
® 6 - Glassware
❑ 2 - Wine Bottle
❑ 7 - Tableware
❑ 3 - Case Bottle
❑ 8 - Kitchenware
❑ 4 - Tumbler
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Pharmaceutical Bottle
84. MILITARY OBJECTS:
❑ 1 - Swords
❑ 4 - Artillery Shot & Shell
❑ 2 - Insignia
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Bayonets
85. PERSONAL ITEMS:
❑ 1 - Coins
❑ 3 - Personal Items
❑ 2 - Keys
❑ 9 - Other
86. PIPES:
❑ 1 - Tobacco Pipe
❑ 3 - Pipe Stems
❑ 2 - Stub -Stemmed Pipes
❑ 9 - Other
87. TEMPORALLY DIAGNOSTIC ARTIFACTS:
COMMENTS
88. OWNER/TENANT INFORMATION: Unknown
89. DIRECTIONS TO SITE: The site is located north from the juncture of Haynes Drive and Zeb Haynes Road in an open
field. Site is located on Parcel Number xxxxxxxxxxx / Pin ID: xxxxxxxx
90. RESEARCH POTENTIAL: No Further Work Required
91. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Site 1902-03 represents a low density nineteenth to twentieth-century
artifact scatter. Though architectural material was present within the assemblage in the form of two small brick fragments, no
evidence of a former structure was evident at the site. The site appears to be a small scatter of general debris and retains little to
no research potential. Stantec recommends Site 1902-03 as not eligible for NRHP inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A
through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further archaeological work is recommended.
92. EXCAVATION RESULTS:
93. EXPLANATION OF IMPACTS: The site has been prevously cleared and greatly impacted by machine rutting and logging
activity. Natural impacts to the site primarily include erosion and bioturbation from fauna in the field.
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 5

Site #: 31
94. TESTING RESULTS: One shovel tests was excavated within the site to determine depth of soil. This test was negative and
helped to show the soils at the site have been truncated by previous logging activity and heavy machine rutting. Artifacts were
collected during surface inspection of exposed subsoil areas. In total, 30 historic artifacts were recovered. The assemblege was
predominately comprised of domestic glassware and ceramic.
95. FEATURE DESCRIPTION:
96. OTHER IMPORTANT ARTIFACT TYPES:
97. HISTORIC CERAMIC TYPES:
98. HISTORIC SITE DESCRIPTION:
99. COMMENTS:
100 -107: OFFICE OF STATE ARCHAEOLOGY USE ONLY
100. NATIONAL REGISTER STATUS:
101. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERION:
102. DATE ON NATIONAL REGISTER:
103. TYPE OF FORM:
104. RECORDER STATUS:
105. FORM RELIABILITY:
106. LOCATIONAL RELIABILITY:
107. FORM DATA CHECKED BY: DATE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 6

rr q1 r ll' — %tom f/ • I .�/,i am
��,•1 _ -ems f -
1902-02 1902-03
7.
' i - ;
a•
••
� •fib � ! '� � _ ��
_ � �.'
Ilk
p 1902-05
4 1 I ��s t i i'�► ! ��
41 �� /� J� • �— Jfq� �\
It
hww�V z
High
~} V •
— f
1 1~ $ tr i
0 1,000 2,000 N
O Archaeological Site I Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by MGS on 2023-01-05
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-05
Clienl/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Stantec, INC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Site Location Map
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM VIII
Office of State Archaeology/Division of Archives & History
1. STATE SITE NUMBER:
2. SITENESSEL NAME(S):
3. OTHER SITE NUMBER:
4. INSTITUTION ASSIGNING: Stantec
5. PROJECT SITE NUMBER:
6. SITE COMPONENT: 2 - Historic
CODE: 135
1902-04
7. SITE REMAINS: A - No Above -ground Remains
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
8. COUNTY: CT
9. QUAD MAP: Maiden 1970
10. BODY OF WATER:
11. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 1 - UTM
12. MAP ZONE: 2 - 17
13. MAP EASTING: 811316
14: RECORDED W/ GPS?: 1 - Yes
MAP CODE: R13
MAP UNITS: 2 -Feet
MAP DATUM: 2 - NAD 27
MAP NORTHING: 353546
GPS DATA POST -PROCESSED?: 1 - Yes
***ATTACH USGS MAP AND ANYADDITIONAL SITE MAPS* * *
15. DATE RECORDED: 12/14/22 RECORDED BY: Ashley Bocan
16. RESULT OF COMPLIANCE PROJECT: 1 - Yes PROJECT NAME: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of
an Approximately I I8.17-Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed CLT10 Maidens Data Center in
Catawba County, North Carolina
17. PROJECT TRACKING NUMBER(S):
18. CODING DATE: 1/10/23
19. CURATION FACILITY:
1. Stantec (135)
2. OSA-109 E. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601
3.
21. ARTIFACT INVENTORY ATTACHED:
22. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE #'S:
23. RECOMMENDATIONS:
CODED BY: Donald Sadler
20. ACCESSION NUMBER:
1.
2.
3.
1 -Yes
1 - No Further Work
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
24. GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION: 6 - 1st Terrace
25. ELEVATION/DEPTH: 923 FT. AMSL
ORDER:
1.
2.
3.

Site #: 31
26. SLOPE PERCENT: LOW 0 % HIGH 6 % SLOPE FACE DIRECTION: 7 - West
27. SOILBOTTOM COMPOSITION: 9 - Sandy Clay
28. NRCS SOIL TYPE CODE: LcB2 SOIL SERIES NAME: Llyod clay loam
29. MODERN VEGETATION: 5 - Scrub Pine Clearing
30. DISTANCE TO WATER/FROM SHORE: 514 (Meters)
31. NEAREST PERMANENT WATER TYPE: 2 - River, Creek, Stream
32. DRAINAGE BASIN: 3 - Catawba
33. SITE SIZE 3 - 26-100 sq. m./31-120 sq. yds.
34. GROUND VISIBILITY: LOW 50 % GROUND VISIBILITY: HIGH 70 %
35. UNDERWATER VISIBILITY (FEET):
36. SITE CONDITION: 3 - Heavy Erosion 27 - Cultivated
37. PERCENT DESTROYED: 4 - 51% - 75% DATE DESTROYED:
38. DESTRUCTION CAUSES: 3 - Land Clearing 2 - Minor Earth Moving/Dredging
INVESTIGATIONS
39. COLLECTION MADE: 1 -Yes
40. COLLECTION STRATEGY: 4 - Total (all visible)
41. AREA COVERED IN CONTROLLED COLLECTION: 100 (SQ. M.)
42. TEST MADE: 2 - No
43. TESTING METHODS:
44. EXCAVATION DATE: 45. INSTITUTION EXCAVATING:
am PREHISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
45. CULTURAL COMPONENT(S):
46. SITE FUNCTION(S):
47. MIDDEN:
48. LITHICS: ❑ 1 Hafted Bifaces/Projectile Pts
❑ 2 Bifaces
❑ 3 Unifacial Tools
❑ 4 Other Unifacial Tools
❑ 5 Cores
49. TOOL TYPES AND FREOUENCIES: #
❑ 6 Primary Debitage
❑ 7 Secondary Debitage
❑ 8 Tertiary Debitage
❑ 9 Ground Or Pecked Stone
❑ 10 Shatter
❑ 99 Other
❑
1 - Clovis
❑
31 - PPt. (Triangular)
❑
2 - Hardaway Blade
❑
32 - PPt. Fra . Notched/Stemmed
❑
3 - Hardaway -Dalton
❑
33 - PPt. Fra (Triangular)
4 - Hardaway Side -Notched
H
34 - PPt. Fra . Indeterminate
5 - Palmer Corner Notched
U
35 - End Scraper (Type I
6 - Kirk Corner -Notched
36 - End Scraper (Type II
7 - St. Albans Side Notched
37 - End Scraper (Type III
8 - LeCroy Bifurcated Stem
38 - Side Scraper (Type I)
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 2

Site #: 31
❑
9 - Kanawha Stemmed
❑
39 - Side Scraper (Type II)
❑
10 - Kirk Serrated
❑
40 - Side Scraper (Type III)
❑
11 - Kirk Stemmed
❑
41 - Pointed Scraper
❑
12 - Stanly Stemmed
❑
42 - Oval Scraper
❑
13 - Morrow Mtn. I Stemmed
❑
43 - Pisgah Triangular
❑
14 - Morrow Mtn. II Stemmed
44 - Haywood Triangular
❑
15 - Guilford Lanceolate
45 - Garden Creek Triangular
❑
16 - Halifax Side -Notched
0
46 - Co ena Triangular
❑
17 - Savannah River Stemmed
❑
47 - Connestee Triangular
❑
18 - Sm. Savannah R. Stemmed
❑
48 - Madison
❑
19 - Gypsy Stemmed
❑
49 - South Appalachian Pentagonal
❑
20 - Swannanoa Stemmed
❑
50 - Transylvania Triangular
❑
21 - Badin Crude Triangular
❑
51 - Otarre
❑
22 - Yadkin Large Triangular
❑
52 - Plott
❑
23 - Roanoke Large Triangular
❑
53 - Big Sand
24 - Uwharrie Triangular
❑
54 - MacCorkle
Lj
25 - Caraway Triangular
L
55 - Bradley Spike
❑
26 - Clarksville Small Triangular
❑
56 - Swansboro
❑
27 - Pee Dee Pentagonal
❑
57 - Yadkin -Eared
❑
28 - Randol h Stemmed
❑
58 - Piscataway
❑
29 - PPt.(Notched)
❑
59 - Roanoke Small Triangular
30 - PPt. Stemmed
60 - Swansboro
99 - Other
50. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
❑ 1 Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 2 Non -Human Bone Or Teeth
❑ 3 Antler
❑ 4 Unworked Marine/River Shell
❑ 5 Worked Marine/River Shell
❑ 6 Turtle Shell
❑ 7 C-14 Sample(s)
❑ 8 Pollen Sample(s)
PREHISTORIC CERAMICS:
51. CERAMIC TEMPER:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
❑
9
Phytolith Sample(s)
❑
10
T-L Sample(S)
❑
11
Sediment Sample(s)
❑
12
Wood
❑
13
Fiber
❑
14
Fabric
❑
15
Fire -Cracked Rock
❑
99
Other
52. SURFACE TREATMENT:
53. TYPE NAME:
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
9.
10.
10.
HISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
54. PERIOD OF OCCUPATION BEGIN:
55. REFINED DATE FROM:
56. HISTORIC AFFILIATION:
57. HISTORIC DEFINITION:
58. SITE TYPE/FEATURE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH
PERIOD OF OCCUPATION END:
REFINED DATE TO:
Page 3

Site #: 31
(NOTE: IF RESPONSE 58 IS #65, WATER VESSEL, COMPLETE ITEMS 59 — 76,
AND APPLICABLE ITEMS FROM HISTORIC ARTIFACTS)
VESSEL INFORMATION
59. DATA SOURCE:
60. PRIMARY HULL CONSTRUCTION: DETAIL:
61. HULL FASTENINGS: DETAIL:
62. HULL DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
63. WRECKAGE DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
64. ESTIMATED ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH:
HOW DETERMINED:
65. ESTIMATE OF ORIGINAL VESSEL REMAINING: %
66. MEANS OF PROPULSION: PRIMARY: SECONDARY: DETAILS:
67. SAIL POWERED: NUMBER OF MASTS: OBSERVABLE REMAINS:
SAIL CONFIGURATION (IF POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE):
DETAILS:
68. ENGINE POWERED: MECHANISM: DETAILS:
ENGINE NUMBER: TYPE:
BOILER NUMBER: TYPE:
69. ALTERNATE MEANS OF POWER (IF ANY): DETAILS:
70. CAUSE OF LOSS: DETAILS:
71. COUNTRY OF CONSTRUCTION (IF KNOWN):
72. ARTIFACT CATEGORIES OBSERVED: ❑ Cargo
❑ Ordnance
❑ Ship's Equipment
❑ Personal Effects
❑ Other
73. PURPOSE OF CRAFT: DETAILS:
74. TYPE OF VESSEL:
75. VESSEL DESCRIPTION:
76. VISIT HISTORY (DATE, ORGANIZATION, PURPOSE, RESULTS):
HISTORIC ARTIFACTS
77. ACTIVITIES GROUP:
FEET DEPTH: FEET
FUEL:
❑ I - Construction Tools ❑ 6 - Storage Items
❑ 2 - Farm Tools ❑ 7 - Ethnobotanical
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form V111 Page 4

Site #: 31
78. AGRICULTURE:
79. ARCHITECTURAL GROUP
❑ 3 - Toys
❑ 4 - Fishing Gear
❑ 5 - Colonial -Indian Pottery
❑ 1 - Farm Tool
❑ 2 - Assoc. w/ Stable/Barn
❑ 1 - Window Glass
❑ 2 - Nails
❑ 3 - Spikes
❑ 8 - Associated With Stable Or Barn
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Fencing Material
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 4 - Construction Hardware
❑ 5 - Door Lock Parts
❑ 9 - Other
80. ARMS GROUP:
❑ 1 - Musket Balls, Shot, Sprue
❑ 3 - Gun Parts, Bullet Molds
❑ 2 - Gun Flints, Gunspalls
❑ 9 - Other
81. CLOTHING GROUP:
❑ 1 -Buckles
❑ 6 - Hook & Eye Fasteners
❑ 2 - Thimbles
❑ 7 - Bale Seals
❑ 3 - Buttons
❑ 8 - Glass Beads
❑ 4 - Scissors
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Straight Pins
82. HISTORIC MISCELLANEOUS:
❑ 1 - Bone Fragment
❑ 4 - Silversmithing Debris
❑ 2 - Furniture Hardware
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Button Manufacturing Blanks
83. KITCHEN GROUP:
® 1 - Ceramics
® 6 - Glassware
❑ 2 - Wine Bottle
❑ 7 - Tableware
❑ 3 - Case Bottle
❑ 8 - Kitchenware
❑ 4 - Tumbler
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Pharmaceutical Bottle
84. MILITARY OBJECTS:
❑ 1 - Swords
❑ 4 - Artillery Shot & Shell
❑ 2 - Insignia
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Bayonets
85. PERSONAL ITEMS:
❑ 1 - Coins
❑ 3 - Personal Items
❑ 2 - Keys
❑ 9 - Other
86. PIPES:
❑ 1 - Tobacco Pipe
❑ 3 - Pipe Stems
❑ 2 - Stub -Stemmed Pipes
❑ 9 - Other
87. TEMPORALLY DIAGNOSTIC ARTIFACTS:
COMMENTS
88. OWNER/TENANT INFORMATION: Unknown
89. DIRECTIONS TO SITE: The site is located in an overgrown field of former woodland north of Zeb Haynes Road. Site is
located on Parcel Number xxxxxxxxxxx / Pin ID: xxxxxxxx
90. RESEARCH POTENTIAL: No Further Work Required
91. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Site 1902-04 represents a low density nineteenth to twentieth-century
artifact scatter. No architectural material was present in the assemblage. No evidence of a former structure was evident at the
site. The soil here has been previously logged and is damaged by heavy machine rutting. The site appears to be a small scatter
of general debris and retains little to no research potential. Stantec recommends Site 1902-04 as not eligible for NRHP
inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further
archaeological work is recommended.
92. EXCAVATION RESULTS:
93. EXPLANATION OF IMPACTS: The site has been prevously cleared and greatly impacted by machine rutting and logging
activity. Natural impacts to the site primarily include erosion and bioturbation from fauna in the field.
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 5

Site #: 31
94. TESTING RESULTS: No shovel tests were excavated within the site. Artifacts were collected during surface inspection of
exposed subsoil areas. In total, 10 historic artifacts were recovered. The assemblege was predominately comprised of domestic
glassware and ceramic.
95. FEATURE DESCRIPTION:
96. OTHER IMPORTANT ARTIFACT TYPES:
97. HISTORIC CERAMIC TYPES:
98. HISTORIC SITE DESCRIPTION:
99. COMMENTS:
100 -107: OFFICE OF STATE ARCHAEOLOGY USE ONLY
100. NATIONAL REGISTER STATUS:
101. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERION:
102. DATE ON NATIONAL REGISTER:
103. TYPE OF FORM:
104. RECORDER STATUS:
105. FORM RELIABILITY:
106. LOCATIONAL RELIABILITY:
107. FORM DATA CHECKED BY: DATE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 6

rr q1 r ll' — %tom f/ • I .�/,i am
��,•1 _ -ems f -
1902-02 1902-03
7.
' i - ;
a•
••
� •fib � ! '� � _ ��
_ � �.'
Ilk
p 1902-05
4 1 I ��s t i i'�► ! ��
41 �� /� J� • �— Jfq� �\
It
hww�V z
High
~} V •
— f
1 1~ $ tr i
0 1,000 2,000 N
O Archaeological Site I Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by MGS on 2023-01-05
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-05
Clienl/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Stantec, INC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Site Location Map
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

NORTH CAROLINA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM VIII
Office of State Archaeology/Division of Archives & History
1. STATE SITE NUMBER:
2. SITENESSEL NAME(S):
3. OTHER SITE NUMBER:
4. INSTITUTION ASSIGNING: Stantec
5. PROJECT SITE NUMBER:
6. SITE COMPONENT: 2 - Historic
CODE: 135
1902-05
7. SITE REMAINS: A - No Above -ground Remains
SITE LOCATION INFORMATION
8. COUNTY: CT
9. QUAD MAP: Maiden 1970
10. BODY OF WATER:
11. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 1 - UTM
12. MAP ZONE: 2 - 17
13. MAP EASTING: 811347
14: RECORDED W/ GPS?: 1 - Yes
MAP CODE: R13
MAP UNITS: 2 -Feet
MAP DATUM: 2 - NAD 27
MAP NORTHING: 353521
GPS DATA POST -PROCESSED?: 1 - Yes
***ATTACH USGS MAP AND ANYADDITIONAL SITE MAPS* * *
15. DATE RECORDED: 12/16/22 RECORDED BY: Ashley Bocan
16. RESULT OF COMPLIANCE PROJECT: 1 - Yes PROJECT NAME: A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of
an Approximately I I8.17-Hectare (292 Acre) Parcel
Associated with the Proposed CLT10 Maidens Data Center in
Catawba County, North Carolina
17. PROJECT TRACKING NUMBER(S):
18. CODING DATE: 1/10/23
19. CURATION FACILITY:
1. Stantec (135)
2. OSA-109 E. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601
3.
21. ARTIFACT INVENTORY ATTACHED:
22. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE #'S:
23. RECOMMENDATIONS:
CODED BY: Donald Sadler
20. ACCESSION NUMBER:
1.
2.
3.
1 -Yes
1 - No Further Work
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
24. GEOGRAPHIC SITUATION: 6 - 1st Terrace
25. ELEVATION/DEPTH: 863 FT. AMSL
ORDER:
1.
2.
3.

Site #: 31
26. SLOPE PERCENT: LOW 0 % HIGH 6 %
27. SOILBOTTOM COMPOSITION: 9 - Sandy Clay
28. NRCS SOIL TYPE CODE: LcB
29. MODERN VEGETATION: 4 - Forested
SLOPE FACE DIRECTION: 6 - Southwest
SOIL SERIES NAME: Llyod loam
30. DISTANCE TO WATER/FROM SHORE: 496 (Meters)
31. NEAREST PERMANENT WATER TYPE: 2 - River, Creek, Stream
32. DRAINAGE BASIN: 3 - Catawba
33. SITE SIZE 1 - 1-10 sq. m./1-12 sq. yds.
34. GROUND VISIBILITY: LOW 0 %
35. UNDERWATER VISIBILITY (FEET):
36. SITE CONDITION: 4 - Wooded
37. PERCENT DESTROYED: 0 - Unknown
GROUND VISIBILITY: HIGH 0 %
DATE DESTROYED:
38. DESTRUCTION CAUSES:
INVESTIGATIONS
39. COLLECTION MADE:
40. COLLECTION STRATEGY:
41. AREA COVERED IN CONTROLLED COLLECTION: (SQ. M.)
42. TEST MADE: 1 - Yes
43. TESTING METHODS: 3 - Shovel Test
44. EXCAVATION DATE: 45. INSTITUTION EXCAVATING:
PREHISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
45. CULTURAL COMPONENT(S):
46. SITE FUNCTION(S):
47. MIDDEN:
48. LITHICS: ❑ 1 Hafted Bifaces/Projectile Pts
❑ 2 Bifaces
❑ 3 Unifacial Tools
❑ 4 Other Unifacial Tools
❑ 5 Cores
49. TOOL TYPES AND FREOUENCIES: #
❑ 6 Primary Debitage
❑ 7 Secondary Debitage
❑ 8 Tertiary Debitage
❑ 9 Ground Or Pecked Stone
❑ 10 Shatter
❑ 99 Other
❑
1 - Clovis
❑
31 - PPt. (Triangular)
❑
2 - Hardaway Blade
❑
32 - PPt. Fra . Notched/Stemmed
3 - Hardaway -Dalton
❑
33 - PPt. Fra . (Triangular)
4 - Hardaway Side -Notched
34 - PPt. Fra . Indeterminate
5 - Palmer Corner Notched
35 - End Scraper (Type I
6 - Kirk Corner -Notched
36 - End Scraper (Type II
7 - St. Albans Side Notched
Ll
37 - End Scraper (Type III
8 - LeCroy Bifurcated Stem
38 - Side Scraper (Type I
9 - Kanawha Stemmed
❑
39 - Side Scraper (Type II
LJ
10 - Kirk Serrated
❑
40 - Side Scraper (Type III
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 2

Site #: 31
❑
11 - Kirk Stemmed
L
41 - Pointed Scraper
❑
12 - Stanly Stemmed
❑
42 - Oval Scraper
❑
13 - Morrow Mtn. I Stemmed
❑
43 - Pisgah Triangular
❑
14 - Morrow Mtn. II Stemmed
❑
44 - Haywood Triangular
❑
15 - Guilford Lanceolate
❑
45 - Garden Creek Triangular
❑
16 - Halifax Side -Notched
46 - Co ena Triangular
❑
17 - Savannah River Stemmed
47 - Connestee Triangular
❑
18 - Sm. Savannah R. Stemmed
0
48 - Madison
❑
19 - Gypsy Stemmed
❑
49 - South Appalachian Pentagonal
❑
20 - Swannanoa Stemmed
❑
50 - Transylvania Triangular
❑
21 - Badin Crude Triangular
❑
51 - Otarre
❑
22 - Yadkin Large Triangular
❑
52 - Plott
❑
23 - Roanoke Large Triangular
❑
53 - Big Sandy
❑
24 - Uwharrie Triangular
❑
54 - MacCorkle
❑
25 - Caraway Triangular
❑
55 - Bradley Spike
26 - Clarksville Small Triangular
❑
56 - Swansboro
27 - Pee Dee Pentagonal
L
57 - Yadkin -Eared
❑
28 - Randolph Stemmed
❑
58 - Piscataway
❑
29 - PPt.(Notched)
❑
59 - Roanoke Small Triangular
❑
30 - PPt. Stemmed
❑
60 - Swansboro
❑
99 - Other
50. OTHER
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS:
❑
1
Human Bone Or Teeth
❑
2
Non -Human Bone Or Teeth
❑
3
Antler
❑
4
Unworked Marine/River Shell
❑
5
Worked Marine/River Shell
❑
6
Turtle Shell
❑
7
C-14 Sample(s)
❑
8
Pollen Sample(s)
PREHISTORIC CERAMICS:
51. CERAMIC TEMPER:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
❑
9
Phytolith Sample(s)
❑
10
T-L Sample(S)
❑
11
Sediment Sample(s)
❑
12
Wood
❑
13
Fiber
❑
14
Fabric
❑
15
Fire -Cracked Rock
❑
99
Other
52. SURFACE TREATMENT:
53. TYPE NAME:
1.
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
9.
9.
10.
10.
HISTORIC SITE INFORMATION
54. PERIOD OF OCCUPATION BEGIN:
55. REFINED DATE FROM:
56. HISTORIC AFFILIATION:
57. HISTORIC DEFINITION:
58. SITE TYPE/FEATURE:
PERIOD OF OCCUPATION END:
REFINED DATE TO:
(NOTE: IF RESPONSE 58 IS #65, WATER VESSEL, COMPLETE ITEMS 59 - 76,
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 3

Site #: 31
AND APPLICABLE ITEMS FROM HISTORICARTIFACTS)
VESSEL INFORMATION
59. DATA SOURCE:
60. PRIMARY HULL CONSTRUCTION: DETAIL:
61. HULL FASTENINGS: DETAIL:
62. HULL DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
63. WRECKAGE DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
64. ESTIMATED ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS: LENGTH: FEET WIDTH: FEET DEPTH: FEET
HOW DETERMINED:
65. ESTIMATE OF ORIGINAL VESSEL REMAINING: %
66. MEANS OF PROPULSION: PRIMARY: SECONDARY: DETAILS:
67. SAIL POWERED: NUMBER OF MASTS: OBSERVABLE REMAINS:
SAIL CONFIGURATION (IF POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE):
DETAILS:
68. ENGINE POWERED: MECHANISM:
DETAILS:
ENGINE NUMBER:
TYPE:
BOILER NUMBER:
TYPE:
69. ALTERNATE MEANS OF POWER (IF ANY):
DETAILS:
70. CAUSE OF LOSS:
DETAILS:
71. COUNTRY OF CONSTRUCTION (IF KNOWN):
72. ARTIFACT CATEGORIES OBSERVED:
❑ Cargo
❑ Ordnance
❑ Ship's Equipment
❑ Personal Effects
❑ Other
73. PURPOSE OF CRAFT: DETAILS:
74. TYPE OF VESSEL:
75. VESSEL DESCRIPTION:
76. VISIT HISTORY (DATE, ORGANIZATION, PURPOSE, RESULTS):
HISTORIC ARTIFACTS
FUEL:
77. ACTIVITIES GROUP: ❑ 1 - Construction Tools ❑ 6 - Storage Items
❑ 2 - Farm Tools ❑ 7 - Ethnobotanical
❑ 3 - Toys ❑ 8 - Associated With Stable Or Barn
❑ 4 - Fishing Gear ❑ 9 - Other
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIII Page 4

Site #: 31
78. AGRICULTURE:
79. ARCHITECTURAL GROUP
80. ARMS GROUP:
81. CLOTHING GROUP:
❑ 5 - Colonial -Indian Pottery
❑ 1 - Farm Tool
❑ 2 - Assoc. w/ Stable/Barn
❑ 1 - Window Glass
❑ 2 - Nails
❑ 3 - Spikes
❑ 1 - Musket Balls, Shot, Sprue
❑ 2 - Gun Flints, Gunspalls
❑ 1 - Buckles
❑ 2 - Thimbles
❑ 3 - Buttons
❑ 4 - Scissors
❑ 5 - Straight Pins
❑ 3 - Fencing Material
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 4 - Construction Hardware
❑ 5 - Door Lock Parts
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Gun Parts, Bullet Molds
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 6 - Hook & Eye Fasteners
❑ 7 - Bale Seals
❑ 8 - Glass Beads
❑ 9 - Other
82. HISTORIC MISCELLANEOUS: ❑ 1 - Bone Fragment
❑ 4 - Silversmithing Debris
❑ 2 - Furniture Hardware
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 -Button Manufacturing Blanks
83. KITCHEN GROUP: ® 1 - Ceramics
❑ 6 - Glassware
❑ 2 - Wine Bottle
❑ 7 - Tableware
❑ 3 - Case Bottle
❑ 8 - Kitchenware
❑ 4 - Tumbler
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 5 - Pharmaceutical Bottle
84. MILITARY OBJECTS: ❑ 1 - Swords
❑ 4 - Artillery Shot & Shell
❑ 2 - Insignia
❑ 9 - Other
❑ 3 - Bayonets
85. PERSONAL ITEMS: ❑ 1 - Coins
❑ 3 - Personal Items
❑ 2 - Keys
❑ 9 - Other
86. PIPES: ❑ 1 - Tobacco Pipe
❑ 3 - Pipe Stems
❑ 2 - Stub -Stemmed Pipes
❑ 9 - Other
87. TEMPORALLY DIAGNOSTIC ARTIFACTS:
COMMENTS
88. OWNER/TENANT INFORMATION: Unknown
89. DIRECTIONS TO SITE: The find is located in a light woodland north of a residential property at the junction of Old
Maiden Road and Zeb Haynes Road. Site is located on Parcel Number xxxxxxxxxxx / Pin ID: xxxxxxxx
90. RESEARCH POTENTIAL: No Further Work Required
91. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS: Site 1902-05 represents an isolated historic find. No additional shovel tests
were positive for cultural material in the vicinity. No surface or subsurface features were evident at the site. The find appears to
be a general debris and retains little to no research potential. Stantec recommends Site 1902-05 as not eligible for NRHP
inclusion under Criterion D; Criteria A through C were not considered applicable to the evaluation of this resource. No further
archaeological work is recommended.
92. EXCAVATION RESULTS:
93. EXPLANATION OF IMPACTS: Natural impacts to the site primarily include erosion and bioturbation from fauna in the
field.
94. TESTING RESULTS: Shovel tests were excavated at 30-meter (98.4-foot) intervals. One shovel tests were positive for
cultural material. In total one historic ceramic were recovered. No radial shovel tests were postivive for additional cultural
material.
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 5

Site #: 31
95. FEATURE DESCRIPTION:
96. OTHER IMPORTANT ARTIFACT TYPES:
97. HISTORIC CERAMIC TYPES:
98. HISTORIC SITE DESCRIPTION:
99. COMMENTS:
100 - 107: OFFICE OF STATE ARCHAEOLOGY USE ONLY
100. NATIONAL REGISTER STATUS:
101. NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERION:
102. DATE ON NATIONAL REGISTER:
103. TYPE OF FORM:
104. RECORDER STATUS:
105. FORM RELIABILITY:
106. LOCATIONAL RELIABILITY:
107. FORM DATA CHECKED BY: DATE:
North Carolina Archaeological Site Form VIH Page 6

rr q1 r ll' — %tom f/ • I .�/,i am
��,•1 _ -ems f -
1902-02 1902-03
7.
' i - ;
a•
••
� •fib � ! '� � _ ��
_ � �.'
Ilk
p 1902-05
4 1 I ��s t i i'�► ! ��
41 �� /� J� • �— Jfq� �\
It
hww�V z
High
~} V •
— f
1 1~ $ tr i
0 1,000 2,000 N
O Archaeological Site I Feet
(At original document size of 8.Sx11)
1:24,000
® Stantec
Project Location Prepared by ECL on 2022-12-21
TR by MGS on 2023-01-05
Catawba County, North Carolina IR by BSS on 2023-01-05
Clienl/Project 203401902
Microsoft
Notes MS CLT10 Environmental Permitting
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane North Carolina
FPS 3200 Feet
Figure No.
2. Data Sources: Stantec, INC Geodetic Survey
3. Topographic map © USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic
Map, Maiden, NC Quadrangle, 1996 Title
Site Location Map
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: This document has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited in the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors
or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format, and the recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data.

A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF AN APPROXIMATELY 118.17-HECTARE (292 ACRE)
PARCEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED MAIDENS SITE (CLT10) IN CATAWBA COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Appendix C KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES
Appendix C KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES

Donald Sadler, MA
Project Archaeologist
(3 Stantec
Mr. Sadler has over 23 years of professional experience as an archaeologist. He has excavated on sites across Virginia,
including Jamestown, as well as Greece, Bermuda, Georgia and Maryland, on both academic and professional projects.
He has over a decade of experience as the primary field archaeologist supervising excavations at the Phase I, II and III
levels involving the prehistoric and Euro-American history of the Chesapeake region. His duties at have included Phase I
and II evaluations as a field technician and Field Supervisor. He has also assisted Senior Principal Investigators in report
writing, management summaries, and historic research. Donnie has experience in historic ceramic analysis, 18th-century
material culture analysis, managing archaeological collections, and database management.
EDUCATION
Master of Arts, Historical Archaeology, College of
William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, 2006
Bachelor of Arts, Anthropology with Honors, minor in
History, College of William & Mary, Williamsburg,
Virginia, 2001
CERTIFICATIONS & TRAINING
HAZWOPER 40 hour Certificate, Statewide, Virginia,
2018
Confined Space Awareness Training, Statewide,
Virginia, 2016
RPA certified course "Metal Detecting for the
Archaeologist", Nationwide, US, 2015
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Data Recovery of Site 44JC0664, James City County,
Virginia
Donald oversaw the data recovery effort for Site 44JC0664, a
Colonial era domestic site with a Civil War encampment
component. Donald managed all field staff, monitored
mechanical excavations, participated in feature excavation, and
participated in photodocumentation of the site as well as the
production of scale drawings. The site was situated within an
active construction zone and Donald coordinated with on -site
contractors and ensured that all staff followed safety protocol.
Donald is currently synthesizing the recovered data and writing
a detailed technical report describing the results of the
investigation.
Documentary Research for the Sammons Cemetery,
Albemarle County, Virginia
Documentary Research for the Sammons Cemetery. Report
on file at the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) in
Richmond, Virginia.
City of Fredericksburg - Phase I Archaeological Survey,
Phase II Evaluation, and Phase III Data Recovery for
the Proposed Courthouse Facility at the Intersection of
Princess Anne and Charlotte Streets, (Southeastern
Quadrant of Block 42), City of Fredericksburg, Virginia
Three -stage archaeological investigation of a historic domestic
site in the City of Fredericksburg in advance of the construction
of a new Courthouse facility. The project resulted in the
identification of 18th and 19th century domestic deposits
including a Civil War period cellar dating to 1863. Work
included archaeological fieldwork, extensive historic research,
site interpretation, and final reporting. Also included was the
development of an interpretive display featuring the sites to
satisfy public participation requirements and highlight the
significance of the lot and the site. Responsibilities included
field supervision and direction for all fieldwork, field notes, and
reporting.
Phase IA/Stage I Analysis for the Proposed Dominion
Virginia Power Warrenton -Wheeler -Gainesville 230 kV
Transmission Line Project, Fauquier and Prince William
Counties, Virginia
Donald managed a cultural resources crew for the completion
of a Phase IA/Stage I Cultural Resources Assessment for the
proposed - 20 mile Warrenton -Wheeler -Gainesville 230 kV
Transmission line project.
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of Approximately
9.4 Miles of the Proposed Dominion Virginia Power
Dahlgren 230 kV Transmission Line*, King George
County, Virginia
Donald and crew conducted a Phase 1 Cultural Resources
Survey of a proposed Dominion Power 230kV utility line in King
George County, Virginia. The proposed route of the Dahlgren
line covers a distance of approximately 9.4 miles. Work
included archaeological and architectural survey for the APE
defined by the project for the entire corridor.
* denotes projects completed with other firms Design with community in mind

Donald Sadler, MA
Project Archaeologist
A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of Approximately
39.0 Miles of Proposed Improvements to the Dominion
Virginia Power 500 kV Transmission Line from the
Lexington Substation to the Dooms Substation, Augusta
and Rockbridge Counties, Virginia
Donald and crew conducted a Phase 1 Cultural Resources
Survey of a proposed Dominion Power 230kV utility line in
August and Rockbridge counties, Virginia. The proposed route
of the Lexington to Doom line covers a distance of
approximately 39 miles. Work included archaeological and
architectural survey for the APE defined by the project for the
entire corridor.
Benns Church Substation Rebuild Project, Isle of Wight
County, Virginia
Donald directed the field effort for a Phase 1 survey of
approximately 3.332 acres associated with the Dominion
Virginia Power Benns Church Substation Rebuild Project and
Phase 11 evaluation of Site 441W0275, a Woodland period
temporary camp site. Responsibilities included directing field
staff in systematic shovel testing and test unit excavation,
photodocumentation of the project APE and Site 441W0275,
and the production of scale drawings associated with the
Phase 11 evaluation effort.
Dahlgren 230 kV Transmission Line Project, King
George County, Virginia
Mr. Sadler led the field effort for a Phase I survey of
approximately 9.4 miles associated with the Dominion Virginia
Power Dahlgren 230 kV Transmission line project in King
George County, Virginia. Mr. Sadler was responsible for crew
management, coordination with local landowners, systematic
shovel testing, and recordation.
VDOT - Archaeological Survey for Proposed
Improvements to 1-64, Segment 2, James City and York
Counties, Virginia
Archaeological survey support for proposed improvements to
Segment 2 of the 1-64 improvement project in James City and
York Counties Virginia. The project included archaeological
survey of approximately 7 miles of proposed roadway
improvements and expansion. The project included traditional
archaeological survey as well as metal detecting for military
related resources. Responsibilities included field supervision
and direction for all fieldwork, field notes, and reporting.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
(3 Stantec
US Coast Guard Training Facility, Yorktown —
Archaeological Monitoring for Water Line Replacement*,
Yorktown, Virginia
As subconsultant to Tetra Tech Tesoro, Donald provided
archaeological monitoring for the replacement of a water line
supporting the USCG TRACEN facility. The water line crossed
the NRHP-listed Yorktown National Battlefield. Services
included daily on -site monitoring, recordation of soil profiles
and conditions and documentation of archaeological deposits.
Fort Monroe — On -call Archaeological Support Services,
Fort Monroe, Hampton, Virginia
Donald provided on -call archaeological support services to the
Fort Monroe Authority, Hampton, Virginia. Fort Monroe is a
former Army Base a portion of which was transferred to the
Commonwealth of Virginia in 2011. Services provided included
emergency response services, Phase 1 level archaeological
survey, archaeological monitoring, and reporting.
Cemetery Verification and Delineation Study for Site
44KGO223 along the Proposed Dominion Virginia Power
Dahlgren 230 kV Transmission Line, King George
County, Virginia
Donald led the field effort, monitoring mechanical excavations
to identify potential grave shaft features and overseeing the
metal detecting effort. The project proved that the site did not
extend into the proposed transmission line right-of-way.
Cemetery Removal and Reburial at the Abberly at
Stafford Development, Stafford County, Virginia
Donald assisted with a cemetery documentation and
excavation of 29 burial features at Abberly in Stafford County,
Virginia. The project included documentation, removal and
reburial of the cemetery. Responsibilities included directing the
field effort and documenting and removing burial features.
Cemetery Recovery for the Abberly at Stafford
Development, Stafford County, Virginia
Donald led the field effort, monitoring mechanical excavations
to identify potential grave shaft features and overseeing and
participating in the archaeological recovery of human remains.
Donald managed field staff during the recovery effort and
assisted with the reburial effort.

Sandra DeChard ® Stantec
Senior Architectural Historian
Ms. Sandra DeChard is an Architectural Historian with over 25 years of experience in cultural resources as an
architectural historian and archaeologist working in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
New Jersey, Maryland, Arizona, California, Washington, Oregon, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire.
Her experience includes large- and small-scale architectural Phase I level surveys for transmission line corridors
and transportation infrastructure as well as cost share projects in conjunction with local municipalities, Phase II
level survey, stabilization plans, historic structures reports, and National Register of Historic Places nominations.
Her range of experience also extends to detailed historical research and archival review, scaled architectural
drawings and other technical drawings, signage and heritage tourism brochures, as well as museum displays.
Additionally, Sandra was a founding member and Chairperson of the Martinsville, Virginia Architectural Review
Board and has lectured on various Art, Art History, and Architectural topics as educator in humanities and as a
guest speaker.
Sandra's current responsibilities at Stantec include architectural surveys at the Phase I and II levels, managerial
tasks associated with architectural investigations, writing and editing technical reports, consultation with and
representation of clients before state and national review agencies, and developing and managing project
budgets and scopes of work.
EDUCATION
M.A. Preservation Studies, Architectural History,
Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, 2000
B.S. Interior Design, University of Delaware, Newark,
Delaware, 1989
CERTIFICATIONS & TRAINING
Section 106 Certification, Richmond, Virginia, 2014
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Transmission & Distribution, Transmission Lines
Dominion Energy Virginia - A Phase I Cultural
Resources Survey of Approximately 7.39 Miles
Associated with the Fudge Hollow to Low Moor Line
# 112 138 kV Transmission Line Partial Rebuild, City of
Covington, Alleghany County, Virginia
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project which included the
documentation of 124 resources at a Phase I level
within the defined APE of the project. The project
also included the evaluation of the resources for
NRHP eligibility.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
Dominion Energy Virginia - A Phase I Cultural
Resources Survey of Approximately 14.5 Miles
Associated with the Proposed Valley to Dooms 500
kV Rebuild Project in Augusta County, Virginia
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian for the project which included the
documentation of 306 resources at a Phase I level
within the defined APE of the project. The project
also included the evaluation of the resources for
NRHP eligibility.
Roadways
NCDOT - Historic Structures Survey Report T.I.P. No.
U-6077, Widening of SR 4315/Kernersville Road from
SR 2632/Sedge Garden Road to Harmon Creek
Road, Forsyth County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the project which included an intensive level survey
of two resources within the area of potential effect
for the proposed road improvements. The project
also included a National Register of Historic Places
eligibility evaluation for each of the resources
surveyed.

Sandra DeChard
Senior Architectural Historian
NCDOT - Historic Structures Survey Report for T.I.P.
No. U-3609B, Widening US 13 (Berkeley Boulevard)
from SR 1003 (New Hope Road) to SR 1572 (Saulston
Road) in the City of Goldsboro, Wayne County,
North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the project which included an intensive level survey
of two resources within the area of potential effect
for the proposed road improvements. The project
also included a National Register of Historic Places
eligibility evaluation for each of the resources
surveyed.
NCDOT - Building Inventory for TIP# U-5863, Widen
NC 133 (Castle Hayne Road) from 1-140/US17
(Wilmington Bypass) to SR 1310 (Division Drive, New
Hanover County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the project which included building inventory of
136 resources within the area of potential effect for
the proposed road improvements.
NCDOT - Historic Structure Survey for TIP# R-574313,
Widen US 23/US441 from US 64 to SR 1652 (Wide
Horizon Drive)/SR1 152 (Belden Circle) to South of
SR1649 (Prentiss Bridge Road), Franklin, Macon
County, North Carolina
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the project which included an intensive level survey
of five resources within the area of potential effect
for the proposed road improvements. The project
also included a National Register of Historic Places
eligibility evaluation for each of the resources
surveyed.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
(3 Stantec
VDOT - A Phase I Architectural Survey for the
Proposed Cochran Mill Road Bridge Replacement,
Loudoun County, Virginia
Sandra served as architectural historian for the
survey. The survey included the documentation of
three resources at a Phase I level including the
bridge as well as two resources immediately
adjacent to and in view of the Cochran Mill Road
Bridge.
VDOT - An Architectural Survey for the Route 15/29
Bridge Replacement*, Culpeper County, Virginia
Ms. DeChard served as Architectural Historian for
the survey. The survey entailed the recordation of
three resources, including the bridge, within the
study area. Evaluations of NRHP eligibility for each
resource were also conducted.
Bridges
City of Atlanta- Architectural Survey of the Powers
Ferry Road Bridge over Nancy Creek, Powers Ferry
Road, Atlanta, Georgia
Ms. DeChard served as Senior Architectural
Historian, Principal Investigator for the survey. The
survey documented the bridge at a Phase I level
and utilized historic background research as well as
an architectural evaluation of the resource's
integrity in order to make a recommendation of
the bridge's NRHP eligibility.
VDOT - Page County Bridge National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form*, Page County,
Virginia
Ms. DeChard conducted detailed research and
authored the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) nomination form for the Page County
Bridge, Page County, Virginia.

Brynn Stewart, MA
Program Manager/Senior Principal Investigator
(3 Stantec
Brynn is the Program Manager/Senior Principal Investigator for Cultural Resources in Stantec's
Williamsburg, Virginia, office. She has over 18 years of experience in cultural resources management. Brynn
meets the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines for a professional archaeologist. She has
served as a Principal Investigator and Project Archaeologist on numerous transportation and energy -related
projects as well as private development projects.
Brynn manages in-house technical staff, supervises technical document preparation, and provides quality
control and peer review for cultural resources studies. Her expertise includes all phases of cultural resource
management (archaeological assessments and Phase I, II, and III excavations) in compliance with local,
state, and federal laws and regulations. Brynn's experience includes managerial tasks associated with all
aspects of cultural resource management projects such as consultation with and representation of clients
before state and national review agencies, writing and editing technical reports, preparing and managing
project budgets, and developing and implementing archaeological research designs.
Brynn also has experience in the processing and analysis of artifact collections with special interest in
Colonial -era ceramics and lithic analysis and the development and production of interpretive materials
including pamphlets and exhibits.
EDUCATION
Master of Arts, Anthropology, University of
Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, 2009
Bachelor of Arts, Anthropology, Washington
College, Chestertown, Maryland, 2004
CERTIFICATIONS & TRAINING
OSHA Excavation Safety: Satisfies 29 CFR
1926.650
OSHA Confined Space Safety: Satisfies 29 CFR
1910.246, 29 CFR 1926.1001, 29 CFR 1915.1001
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Ore Bank Undergrounding Project, Rockingham
County, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, developing a proposed
scope of work and budget prior to the awarding of the project.
Brynn directed pre -fieldwork planning and managed field
personnel. She was responsible for coordinating with the Civil
War Trust and will author the technical report upon completion
of on -going investigations.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
Abberly at South Campus Development, Stafford
County, Virginia (Principal Investigator)
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, developing a proposed
scope of work and budget prior to the awarding of the project.
She directed pre -fieldwork planning, managed field personnel,
and participated in Phase ll evaluation of Site 44ST1141.
Brynn synthesized data collected during evaluation and
served as the lead author of the resulting technical report.
Data Recovery of Sites 44PW 1305 and
44PW1306 for the Eagles Pointe Landbay A
Section 2 Development Project, Prince William
County, Virginia
Brynn is serving as Principal Investigator for this on -going
project. She developed the scope of work and budget prior to
the awarding of the project. Brynn coordinated with the client
and the County Archaeologist on the Data Recovery Plan she
developed. She has managed field personnel and coordinated
with the VDHR to procure both an Anticipatory Permit and a
Burial Permit for the excavation of a single burial identified
within Site 44PW1306. Brynn coordinated the placement of
public notice as part of the Burial Permit and gave a
presentation concerning the burial feature to the Prince William
County Historical Commission, which served as a public
meeting as a result of responses received for the said public
notice. Brynn is currently coordinating the reburial of the
recovered remains with a local cemetery and will author the
resulting technical report.

Brynn Stewart, MA
Program Manager/Senior Principal Investigator
Data Recovery of Site 44JC0662, James City
County, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, directing pre -fieldwork
planning and overseeing the field effort. Brynn participated in
feature excavation. She coordinated the field effort with the
client as well as site inspectors and was responsible for
coordinating with local Native American tribal representatives
with an interest in the project. Brynn participated in shovel
testing and monitoring activities, synthesized the data collected
during the project, and served as lead author on the resulting
technical report.
Poplar Grove National Cemetery Archaeological
Investigations and Monitoring, Dinwiddie County,
Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, coordinating with the
NPS and field staff. The NPS conducted rehabilitation at the
cemetery, including the replacement of 5,700 headstones,
rehabilitation of the Superintendent's lodge, restoration of site
furniture and signs, replacement of the flagpole and site
utilities, preservation of the cemetery wall, and rehabilitation of
the landscape. Brynn participated in shovel testing and
monitoring activities, synthesized the data collected during the
project, and served as lead author on the resulting technical
report.
Berkmar Data Recovery, Charlottesville, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, assisting in the
development of a scope of work and budget prior to the
awarding of the project. Brynn directed pre -fieldwork planning
and managed field personnel. She was responsible for
coordinating with client representatives, conducting
excavations, compiling and interpreting fieldwork results, on-
going lithic analysis, and is in the process of co-authoring the
resulting technical report.
Trowbridge-Pantego Transmission Line Project,
Washington and Beaufort Counties, North
Carolina
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, coordinating with
Project Managers and field personnel. Brynn directed pre -
fieldwork planning and was responsible for compiling and
interpreting fieldwork results. She is currently in the process of
co-authored the resulting technical report.
* denotes projects completed with other firms
(3 Stantec
Fredericksburg Courthouse Project, City of
Fredericksburg, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, directing pre -fieldwork
planning and managing field personnel during
Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III investigations of eighteenth -
century through nineteenth-century deposits. She also
participated in fieldwork, synthesized data collected during all
three phases of work, and served as the lead author of the
resulting technical report. She helped develop and produce a
public exhibit of artifacts on display in the new Courthouse.
Dominion Virginia Power Splice Pit within the
Colonial National Historic Park, James City
County, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, leading the field effort
and interpreting data post -field effort. She also authored the
resulting technical report.
Mosby Substation (Laydown Yard and Storm
Water Management Basin Area) Project, Loudoun
County, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, managing the field effort
and interpreting data post -field effort. She also authored the
resulting technical report.
Goose Creek to Loudoun 500kV Transmission
Line Improvement Project, Loudoun County,
Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, developing a proposed
scope of work and budget prior to the awarding of the project.
Brynn directed pre -fieldwork planning and managed field
personnel. She was responsible for coordinating with client
representatives, compiling fieldwork results, interpreting sites,
entering site data into V-CRIS, and co-authoring the resulting
technical report.
Warren County Power Station Proposed Auxiliary
Parking Lot, Warren County, Virginia
Brynn served as Principal Investigator, developing a proposed
scope of work and budget prior to the awarding of the project.
Brynn directed pre -fieldwork planning and managed field
personnel. She was responsible for compiling fieldwork results
and authoring the resulting technical report.

(3 Stantec
Attachment 5:
Public Notice Comment Responses

_R
R C N
_
ER
C U
p
W L
O
U 3
U N
a U
N 216
R
C
L y
R
N d
N R
L=L
H J
a °
d c
'O R
>
° U
y O
O R
°
U
v o
M.
d
Ua
n
`m 0
p
E
o ° m
A C
c°i
=
0 N R
O
N
R
2 U d
0 3
U
N
11
N N
L
` L
7 7
R
U
m
'
t "
o u
o—
E o
E 3
aci
a E
a o
Y
w
R 2 0
o n, i5
T p
m 3
=
N
R R
c
p
O R°
a
�1 .,
N O
c 0
�ayi�
cU
'2EM
Q
z° nE
ANQn
U c°>Z
WOu
c
m
a
'0
N LL
N
va
C U R
!E O
O
O
c�
LL
«'up-i'o- c
O
m
y°
p
N R U
W
TO E
p
« Jc O
O U R C
O
N Q
y V!
7
C
m
C D D U
O
mRmo
Y a
y C
aE'o0R«p
j R
a
'0 c d m
a m d 3
y
E
RN�T
y
o
p c 0 R m
«Ua
T a
E
o N
ryRUZ'
NRN�'�A
aR
a>>
aRm0>o
o2
N« R O C U
U c U
>
E E
N C y
R C d
'�a� =� am
Z mz '>d ma
« rn« 5 £ER v°
d `000.—
3p mo
a 3 9
UJ
R°« o a s
U�ctOi
3
0M0rn a o
O
capNRo t
_ sccTN
a« u
D
d R
od dN RN« bNm m EoO
N `OR
°mO
CU
UrZ
d C °- L_
LL p
N
at a 2
d
N C O
N J L
J y W 4 L C
> N C° N
N L C
6 U j a I E m U
a
N E
y R L N Q & L_ R
C R >>
W M p R J 3 .r C O
y
c0.
ii« oaai2N �3�
ari UU yw° ;c0,
U@ R U N
T O L_ y y in J N-
s
F`od3Ns
d C C '2 d m "' U C OU E c R
r 3 O)Y N
O C C
m A L a g o R J p
w R v C U .P C
a � n 0
R N fn
R
C
N 'O 20 Lu N R V
N ° R
A E J E L R N
a C°
C
`1
LL c w E
M a
N R N N w N> N
N
o rn R° R
o u o o d D c a°
m N O. .- L may" f0 O d N N
> v �'E R 32 m d R o A-- >
o-> a=>'
Et
oaRvpcpL) m`o
2 :E
a° RUw°Y ELL3E Eo t
Ep-
aT
75 L
.po-
No Js O
oay'
L«° d Lr4 LN Oc
Tya
E
n L °
`aym c
3-
r N
° r R O r Q U
OI L c E N N v O� d S O j O
`oET� aaidudw N`o
N
m 3->E>>RE Eovc °-v o
2. 6
L O
C O >.
E E N cLi
3 4 C O N L
d api R d£ an d « �)
N O N N a? O Z N- J R
N E y 3 3 @ R C T f0
r V°'1
2 n N O C Z
~ O R R
C> R O R p y « 9
O O. R U A r W R
�O O U ,•_R• 3= L U N d 0 R R 2 R
N U R R 0_ 2 Z R C _
c
R T a G a O N
« E
y 0- y O c 6« O V N
`2
N Of O N N`«_-
a
°
dC
RR�°m
C O C_
£mtF
y
-°C jU VOOL«CR
0
"
=OO
tUO
ORpRd
a0on2o1op
m'E a`onn
E?r m`OUrnm-'
CFo y O aY O O Z6
�°UmR'ROC
U.2VV> > 2
U
RBM C RZ R
OORR
L L
O Ca N A ON R0
U 0«a'tEZ Y
D
m
R U R
oR dm
>EL a0❑dO
$NR
>m
>E 0❑❑
0o
E
E
Ed p od2R0m
-
aN
t Q
R c
❑Qo
c
N O
2
o
5 R
>
R
c o U N R
«
c
>
m
Z
R
R d R d LL
E
m n°
o
U r m 9
O
Z` Z
L
O R (0 R !�
U
m Z
U
Z U Z w 2 0
C
o E
E
01 E "
o
CN
N
CN
N
CN
J
J
J
G U J
N
N
N

0
4 p a
a � �
m m E
m via
r O y
N m
2i N 3
� m N
6 S c
W
� C o
O
a
« p
a
o
x >
J
� a
U
a � m
m
m
m
d
J c0
m U
y 6
t0
OLLJ
n
�
O 3
m
E0
c
E E m
$ w
o
m
a
E
N C N
U
C O c
O
n m
m
y
r
QS axiQ
T
m L
Ca y r
M c m
w
C
O U n y
ry O
m
3 e-
N
C C -C n
'po
N
"Oo
d C a
w
p
� M w
N
N
0
r 0
d ry
W O
L'EL_.
m
Cw1 E
o L E
}9
K «
p d
w
m
w
mmQ
L
N
raQ
y m
m E mmLr dso E_
c 3 s E
as" m
,�' o• '=
.
O 7 d V O, c O m N L
N
t E V N � � C m V w m N a a
m O> T U 0 y L...
N _ .L-. r .L-.
3 o nm .3 .3 oZ
C
v' �°.
O L t m !2
y° E'oV mdmayi ammm � em,mr
aami�
�..aww mom' yy,y o£
mmt
DOl d"
d0 °doo d=��oisy
n
�>=
m C l0 Y C 7 01 y
oo d
0 dy-o
om m0 acaa 0c
Y °c° Vmi
°>«W
U
mof
o.°%Q.,IT
M.m
yQomm>
°c
oac
oad`>o
o U
dy
z« vo
°Lnaymi
o.a
L.
Lc m�
c°a o E o m y .. :°
m o c
a> m E �Lm. d �, a "'n `0 3 y
a
cJi w ,-mp m a n p3 an d `o
>mn d o
a r o
n L m QQ: '� c o y m
wrn.�>rE°'n`i'i pm_a
m m o a
m a y m c a m
mcy�mm3Eaco
>« o m a
E � � n � ; m
m Ti !^
_ E« o a d
o m `O -mo E- m dt c y�
Ito �m
J000
n ::
ym c°3 m-�poc`o3o3
d L o c .p O m N a
no�oat
'� „' a ._ c
d«° B E d a m E o o
>
m> ' u o m a E d a c= 3 6 t a o d m°
y
o> n
y
>.�2a«No o�R °om
maa
>g oa000 mamic--8'o ,oa ��ma
"o�Fdcyc�-mo
Jcmr d a$E o:=u
m°m°°'d'� ELd
ymmc
mEnay >oa Ei';3cmEc mo33
p_maJa°
po`n°
mo~
moLo°.R� ���oa~eom. `mo'a -seamo
a1a a�° noE2Om
p-o ma
w°£mL a_
>w'o
p y
"w,,., a._ m Jc m� y m o.
mU�om"N«d
G�tCdc mamm
mdu
y N
Tay3._>aw�l�, ycya
EE < N" N c� m o y m c �O O m N C 0> fEp m m A
a
a "T' a L L a o MI6 « N
O L N
ti'Q>- O
U N= C m y N m O O N U°
1.
o -C r m a C N E d L °> > t0 m
N .L.
m« Q y C mo O. A o U y a C� 0 E N° ' C 3 G
m
a s C U, m o@
6 0
m-° m m y y C O p N o d cp Y
o
Kamc mmm"«-55
E O
�c
« m U m m n m .°�' 6 N a N y m N w m v o
mcQ"cmica m._E->mEo to" m�i'`Uc3�'>�ccci
.> m
U
Eni>o-
dv o.o «'�-°�Eamim`m dmo
m L J
6�mL
moo
3...
owZ m'.-mom3m�m`-'d'orm°mmaa2�'ms
o.d p m »tws o hg o o
mn�ccmi FmEda
m'o c a«
2�.. p_d-o dZ Z-o aaa
°° L 3 m 6 > a« O m O N >✓
E
Up c
C !F_ m
v¢i m o?t._ _
rnE >
m J L "' m i f0 O v a o U y Oi C E d N N y' �Yl
3���
> y
a ° U N C Ul
3: mme moo-
. o t :� o«« C '5 U D O« O" a
ord
o U a
m>'=die. ma'm°mao eoi mo °it m�'Qm"
`y-' o �' m m p m- m r 0. m m o> m 16 m 3 a a° S^
a m' o' EI
= Z m U O m
O mmnom°�°m E'E mm"
mc°>>Jo-O-c�UmHm�Emmnmm3oa�mEvm�'mmm.o."mE��ao
_mp .ym,
..mom,
Z Jo m o.y a o t z o
T >
"li C7 .y u
Ew @ O m o c E m E � 5 y 3 z o y r =.mc o m'm ° m oc
y- a y 3 cci �, c coi m r
y
L r m 6 e�p Q Lem
'�_ r
ON A N
Lu
e
Q m y> C L `� m' U 3 0 0` N N
y m `s°
O
a
'N�
o
3 an d m m O 3
7 0 o y m c y y o aQ
d
N N C K n m
m
r� m m d c o N%n
o 'E
2c„yrmyN VLd
a Ermdnvt9avt~cpi
Er- E 3..-r m> a r N
`o
�.o�ammsr csia�E�wm
E r m o a:c �_ °? 22 'o m a c m m" vi m
m m fl-� m
O U O 'm0 z c U N u 6 o tM E m
O C T E
T L. O N :N >m 3 m E vi 5 U m N O y 3 a m d y
LL tV ] U C,£ E y E
m o m
m o m
O Y d
E E
O C d
m E E
U o
t o.
r n'>
Z 0 W C7
Z a LU Ci
vi
N
m N
c N
J O
vi
N
m N
C N
J O

t
U
O
C
m
3
`o
m
d
d
rn
a
� c
9 rn
m d
a
m �
£ c
w a
c a
c
y`� a
O a
R
� R
Q C
-
E
o
X
m
aai
� �
c
�a
o R
c
c
m
E
R 0
Eo
m N
U
d °�
O
R
d R
Q d
a
n
a
Wa
o
o m
m O1
U (0
C
R
U
O
c c n
o rn w
° C
N � O
j` w
@ � m
R
naaO
Q
Qc O
R
c
�`0 W m
U Z
a c W Quo cW o't mm mm
�tcH>. �m3 Em.cm.wo
cgs
a o T
mym°
7�6yUw ao,oEm aaO"'Oi
crn3
`o
aNmao wok° o °3y No��Z
c mog c2c ohzz.3o EOM°h
m.-Ro_�'O
o rn'Qm
�" m c ELL o Tc7 c
y d o._ E
y y m v y
N a R Oa 3-`maN m lOaN
C EU N d r
G
�t @ $mpg o�'y m
°>jaLcc`o2 m"¢
'm`
ooLu
myaama"i
m ocm"-a
d D E 3=U nO¢o m3 m5 =.' m c o �c
o Z m m
t LLU, RZ
o f
y o c �.�
R Z p G y N d z O` GO m O
Z°
p �° m OO O
o w N U U ]. U G w OJ % �. N O ]. O
O C rj U O
N N N f0 0 a a Q W U m U a y O$
°-
C U U t 'C
N U a U m U 'O R O .Q O O a O
o
C °' 3. N C
R°��oa nAa3°m �'-�'
'°aRot3o
N�a `oZ Z.o maoi g'¢'ol
mm°aa°
a.Q Ryco
°•':''p;"=° om'�E9ac'o yah"m
m o'
mc-oN3
o f '- n
a y a
o 75
d�udco
tq 0
d W._ai cm
O
O
a N O L aD '�m.:� ° m C N U
m 2< ° N ami U
N o. O
E
d c o w o m E'a a `o
°° R a R o
a
m LL T o o o° h ac a m t
o, y '.,.mom. 5` O E
m a E m
LL t ° o_
A Q .J.. « Z !- 3 m~ N
m 12 N
c
C Y
p U ry° 16
O LC
O. m J 0 40
Q `a
t
a UmI N d~ a Y f0 a m _, y
y C C R
°U£d3wymmami='c�Nwa"it
m
w
a,cmi >> c oaw ,,x E
QaZmm °?-cQ ma" °`c Qm `o 'O °'a
�� a o-N
R Q C E m y
W_ U@ O o m 0 .° m h° y£ "' a d ip a
m
U N U L N ',•R--• O� U
R m
a
U
R m
C Q
N
E o
.
O Y
> O
We a`
o
N
N

L
@
d v
c
T U
Rn'o2
a d 3 a
of
p°aTd
c_
M.
mE d
N y a
O
o E
S
a
>@ U
R 3
5
N Z T J
tr a d
O
i+ C
E
o N
_ O
o
> N c
N o
2.1
N R C
Cn O
LL R� L N
N
~
as
E
jL_a` R
m c
'c
@ 3
m
£ d
o E w
o 0
O O m
o
N@ d 0 N
@
E n o c
1.2
R N a
p
arc
@
N m o a T
L a
c ".oEo
R
O N
m c c R
3@ N E
N
m
oy°'
moL >°aococ R16 m10 oa-` gd cNd R z
c y
X d c T w -o E d 5 m .E m@ - y .T3S £ .@ d y m m E 5
m o R rna n m t R a c°i an d 3 c Z' a R @ >
N m@ y ' ECN 0 R
@ O @ @ @OO @CipO@ > @ @E d URR aa
W
E v O R > m Nc « ECo
d S > 0 3 �. °E `O E c d E«°
E rn t
y E E o c Ta E.
0 ov n R uUc
3 R N c 'mR C �O m' n y T° E N N R O> m Q @@ C O N d ry 0 0 E p U
L U N «@ c N@ N O
O O 'O N Ip M N « a -O m io m p m E E
O@ C C 2 E
ODE a CE-"-' w _ `-' _@ > > E L -' @ @@ R y N N 3 C C
a m c°� 3$ m m o E c a m '3 m c � N n y' @ m 5 o aai �°o "vim m n E
Rao
o@d a a@dN cO'm «RaT aN u°o1i d
gym[
@ d dC D mowdo« @oc@ @o E mcctO=da oo 0 0t o od 3- m o W R o f E
u. E y C0o NpndE
M.
> a O cc=u
C 4
@ :.. @ (0 d w E O W C O y V@ a L m@ N L O N R l6 Q y aai E 0 J O 2`3 l0 R R@ N n V
L E@ o n« m E '°o c v m d t o a x @ a d; M. w a o % `m N C c a s u N 2
m a U n R V a E n F d T C L d L Ol a 9 T S N t a H N
Q l0 N R o N« O O) a U R .0 @ `« n {°`p
= a o E m =� 3 c@ a a E o c o m o ��Q,� u d a-ai c w m aci o E@ N C E c o N m d y a c
o d E m ° 9 o 3 a 9 L m c N> .p V EL m@ m R a d m a £ E ° 3o m c m V O N i
w U E 30 « O N o N L w N E C " a R O_ C O a N R Q @ '"' O1 N@ N U w L o d p �' O @ U U
U ry O `p m 0 mI O L m~ o a d o m E w �p 7 N` N N m a m cOi L O .L" N N O) EO T n U > a U N n 2
L N L @@ N N @ O N W 'O o a n m N> m R X y6 > N N a o N N m 2 0) 7 @ V U
o T R m 0 O? N IL
c .= d m> N U ° n �y c R 22 m C D L @ O m y C -` @ O U V °' c' E H a O
m N C E a y T L 'U ,� L p- - N« G .R_. @ 9 U N C d@ l6 6 R o .O U E .@. N E U- w a '� C
c��m«r@tea a-p le�tR3@'o 'n a?coma� L>=md°mw b'�'°y doa p @cu
a d�� d o a 5 a S C— Q N E@ c c a d 3 o 'o E N m m°� u c any 2 E n o � m m a H c°i 3 @ w> .
m o °� m 3 ^' E n d s f0 E d E c E m c E o m n w r m R mac o c d a `R £ rn �' o d t
c a« o>> n d' o a - d p«° E> `@ o m>. > N L N a 3 0
O R Q O> O R o o L U@ O L m L @ `- .@_. Uo C N OIL @ C O_ Q> NO R to C C W �_ N p C
N N Vl o�@ d U tr E N c U ao p .. a n fl 6 Z U 3 7 a N 6@ <O 'O R N W 1� .� U- CO r
F @
0 L
O LL Z
K m
@ o a N
o m
a 2 w > N a
U . E U o
p
ZIY U N 7 m