HomeMy WebLinkAbout20171274 Ver 1_Historic/Prehistoric Information_20171009Project Tracking No.:
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 13
16-01-0168
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
PRESENT FORM
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not
valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: B-5668 County: Nash
WBS No: 45623.1.1 Document: PCE or MCC
F.A. No: N/A Funding: State Federal
Federal Permit Required? Yes No Permit Type: NWP3 or NWP14
Project Description: The NCDOT is proposing to replace Bridge No. 103 on SR 1105 (Old Middlesex
Road) over Haw Branch in Nash County. As defined by the NCDOT, the survey area (Area of Potential
Effects [APE]) for archaeology measures 300 feet (91.44 meters) from either end of the existing bridge.
The study corridor is approximately 150 feet (45.72 meters) wide, extending 75 feet (22.86 meters) on
each side of the centerline of the roadway/bridge. The study corridor encompasses approximately 2.23
acres (97,088 square feet) total, inclusive of the existing roadway and bridge.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
An archaeological survey and evaluation of the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 103 on SR 1105 (Old
Middlesex Road) was conducted on April 9, 2016, by Reese Adams and Terri Russ of Environmental
Services, Inc. (ESI). As a result of the investigations, one archaeological site (31NS184) was recorded
within the project’s APE. This site is recommended not eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, and no further archaeological investigations are needed for this project. I concur with this
recommendation as the proposed bridge replacement project will not impact significant archaeological
resources. If the project expands and impacts subsurface areas beyond the APE as currently defined,
further archaeological consultations may be necessary, as determined in consultation with the NCDOT
and/or NC-HPO per the Programmatic Agreement.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed the subject
project and determined:
There are no National Register listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project’s
area of potential effects. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
No subsurface archaeological investigations were required for this project.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
Project Tracking No.:
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2 of 13
16-01-0168
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
Bridge No. 103
Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) conducted an intensive archaeological survey for the replacement of
Bridge No. 103 on SR 1105 (Old Middlesex Road) over Haw Branch in Nash County, North Carolina on
April 9, 2016 (Figures 1 and 2). As defined by the NCDOT, the survey area (Area of Potential Effects
[APE]) for archaeology measures 300 feet (91.44 meters) from either end of the existing bridge. The
study corridor is approximately 150 feet (45.72 meters) wide, extending 75 feet (22.86 meters) on each
side of the centerline of the roadway/bridge. The study corridor encompasses approximately 2.23 acres
(97,088 square feet) total, inclusive of the existing roadway and bridge.
Background Summary
A map review and site file search conducted by NCDOT at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on 2
February 2016 revealed that no comprehensive archaeological survey of this bridge has been conducted,
and no previously recorded sites have been documented within the project’s APE . A search of the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office online database (HPOWEB GIS Service) revealed no
previously recorded historic architectural resources within the APE that have the potential to yield intact
archaeological deposits.
Topographic maps, aerial photography, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil survey
maps, and historic maps were examined for information on natural or cultural factors that might have
affected site locations or preservation. The 1902 topographic quadrangle shows no road or bridge crossing
in the vicinity of the current project area. Haw Branch is labeled as Wilder Creek (Figure 3). The 1926
Soil Survey, 1938 Nash County Highway Map, and 1953 Nash County Highway Map all appear to show
the current road alignment and bridge (Figures 4–6). No structures are shown within the APE on any of
these maps.
Environmental Setting
The APE is located within the Coastal Plain physiographic region and consists of the floodplain and
adjacent terraces of Haw Branch. SR 1105 (Old Middlesex Road) crosses Haw Branch roughly east to
west. Haw Branch drains south-southwest into Turkey Creek, which flows into Buckhorn Reservoir and
Contentnea Creek in Wilson County.
Map units (soil series) are named for the major soil or soils within the unit, but may have minor
inclusions of other soils (NRCS 2015). The floodplain of the APE is mapped as Wehadkee loam (Wh), a
poorly drained, frequently flooded soil series (Table 1). The terrace on the west side of the floodplain
within the APE is mapped as well drained Nason loam (NnB). The terraces on the east side of the
floodplain within the APE are mapped as moderately well drained Altavista sandy loam (AaA) and well
drained Georgeville loam (GeE).
The current archaeological investigation included pedestrian (visual) inspection and shovel testing within
the APE. Photographs of the project area are shown as Figures 7–12. A systematic visual inspection of
the APE was undertaken to search for surface artifacts, above-ground resources, or other signs of cultural
activity. A total of nine shovel tests were excavated during the current investigation (see Figure 2 for
shovel test locations). The APE was divided into four quadrants (e.g., northeast, southeast) based roughly
on their locations relative to the bridge. Each quadrant of the APE is described below.
Project Tracking No.:
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 13
16-01-0168
Table 1: Project Area Soils.
Soil Name Code Slope Drainage Landform
Altavista sandy loam, rarely
flooded AaA 0–3% Moderately
Well Stream terraces
Georgeville loam GeE 10–25% Well Hillslopes on ridges
Wehadkee loam,frequently
flooded Wh 0–2% Poorly Depressions on
Floodplains
Nason loam NnB 2–6% Well Interfluves
Northeast Quadrant
The northeast quadrant of the APE consisted of an overgrown wooded area (Figure 7). A visual
inspection of this portion of the APE revealed no surface artifacts or structural remains. Three shovel tests
(STs 1–3) were excavated within this quadrant of the APE. Shovel tests encountered 20 centimeters or
less of reddish brown loam over reddish brown silty clay loam. No artifacts were recovered from these
shovel tests.
Southeast Quadrant
The majority of the southeast quadrant of the APE consisted of a landscaped residential lawn (Figures 8–
9). The existing road bed has been built up, and slopes steeply down to the grassy lawn within the APE.
Surface visibility in this portion of the APE was fair due to patchy areas of eroded soil; a gene ral visual
inspection of this portion of the APE revealed no surface artifacts. Three shovel tests were excavated
within this portion of the APE (STs 4–6). Shovel testing generally revealed eroded soils, with less than 15
centimeters of strong brown or dark reddish brown sandy clay loam over strong brown clay or clay loam.
ST 4 recovered a quartz biface fragment from just below the root mat (31NS184; described below).
31NS184
Site Size: Isolate
Elevation: 180 feet amsl
Environmental Setting: Residential Lawn
Soil Type: Georgeville loam, 10–25% slopes (GeE)
Nearest Water: 90 meters west, Haw Branch
Surface Visibility: 25%
Field Procedures: Visual Inspection and Shovel Testing (n=4)
Cultural Affiliation: Prehistoric– Lithic (Unknown Subperiod)
Site Function: Isolated Artifact Find
Site Integrity: Poor
Recommendations: Not Eligible, No Further Work
Site Description: Shovel testing in a residential lawn within the APE yielded a biface fragment from less
than five centimeters below ground surface in ST 4 (see Figure 2 for shovel test locations). Three
additional shovel tests (two of which were excavated outside of the APE with landowner permission)
yielded no additional cultural materials.
Summary and Recommendations: This isolated artifact does not have the potential to yield significant
information pertaining to the prehistory of the area. The site is recommended Not Eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
Project Tracking No.:
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
4 of 13
16-01-0168
Northwest Quadrant
The northwest quadrant of the APE consisted of a low, wet area within the floodplain of Haw Branch
(Figure 10). Surface visibility in this portion of the APE was poor due to leaf litter and other
groundcover. Standing water was present throughout the APE. No surface artifacts or evidence of historic
or prehistoric cultural activity were noted. No shovel tests were excavated in this area due to hydric soils.
Southwest Quadrant
The southwest quadrant of the APE consisted of a low, wet area within the floodplain of Haw Branch
(Figure 11). Surface visibility in this portion of the APE was poor due to leaf litter and other
groundcover. A general visual inspection of the southwest quadrant of the APE recorded no surface
artifacts or evidence of historic or prehistoric cultural activity. No shovel tests were excavated in this area
due to hydric soils.
Excavated shovel tests measured 30 centimeters in diameter and were excavated to sterile subsoil,
hydric/saturated soils, or the water table (whichever was encountered first). All soils were excavated by
natural levels (soil strata) and screened through a 0.25-inch hardware mesh. Only one (1) artifact was
recovered during shovel test excavations.
In summary, archaeological investigations recorded a single site, 31NS184, which is recommended not
eligible for the NRHP. As no significant archaeological resources are located within the APE for Bridge
No. 103 in Nash County, it is recommended that this project be allowed to proceed without concern for
impacts to significant cultural resources. Should the boundary of the proposed APE be expanded or
moved, additional archaeological investigations may be necessary, as determined in consultation with the
NCDOT and/or SHPO per the Programmatic Agreement.
REFERENCES CITED
National Geographic Society/ESRI
2011 Middlesex, North Carolina. I-cubed Seamless USGS Quadrangle.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2015 Nash County, North Carolina Soil Survey. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United
States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/
accessed 31 March 2016.
North Carolina State Highway and Public Works Commission
1938 Nash County. On file, North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/1708/rec/18. accessed 28 March
2016.
1953 Nash County. On file, North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/ncmaps/id/8047/rec/21
accessed 28 March 2016.
United States Bureau of Chemistry and Soils: North Carolina Department of Agriculture
1926 Soil Map, North Carolina, Nash County Sheet. On file, North Carolina State Archives,
Raleigh. http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/364/rec/15
accessed 1 April 2016.
Project Tracking No.:
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
5 of 13
16-01-0168
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1902 Spring Hope, N.C., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map. Historical Topographic Map
Collection. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/ accessed 1 April 2016.
1978 Middlesex, N.C., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map. Historical Topographic Map
Collection. http://historicalmaps.arcgis.com/usgs/ accessed 25 March 2016.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: Map(s) Previous Survey Info Photos Correspondence
Signed:
April 25, 2016
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST Date
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
6 of 12
Figure 1. Project Location (Middlesex, NC USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle)
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
7 of 12
Figure 2. Bridge No. 103 APE and Shovel Test Locations
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
8 of 12
Figure 3. 1902 Topographic Quadrangle (Spring Hope, N.C.)
Figure 4. 1926 Soils Map of Nash County
Approximate Project Area
Approximate Project Area
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
9 of 12
Figure 5. 1938 County Map
Figure 6. 1953 County Map
Approximate Project Area
Approximate Project Area
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
10 of 12
Figure 7. Northeast Quadrant of APE, facing East
Figure 8. Southeast Quadrant of APE, facing East
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
11 of 12
Figure 9. Southeast Quadrant of APE, facing West
Figure 10. Northwest Quadrant of APE, facing Northeast
31NS184 (ST4)
Project Tracking No.
“NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AFFECTED”
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
12 of 12
Figure 11. Southwest Quadrant of APE, facing East
Figure 12. Bridge 103, facing East from Northwest Quadrant
Project Tracking No.