The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20180326 Ver 1_17BP 5 R 69 No NRHP Archaeological Sites Present Form_20180307Project Tracictng No.: 16-10-0010 NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES o�� ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES .� `�y`� $�a�� ' � ':Q,: :� '' �` PRESENT FORM i�' � � :��p� �:� �=` "¢ o�°_ '�' 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 �.�4� Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No. WBS No Structure 340020 17BP.S.R.69 County: Document: Franklin State MCC F.A. No: N/A Funding: � State ❑ Federal Federal Permit Required? � Yes ❑ No Permit Type.• Not Specifed Project Description: NCDOT's Division 5 proposes to replace Bridge No. 20 on SR 1114 (Peach Orchard Road) over Cedar Creek in Franklin County. Bridge No. 20 was built in 1951, and is considered to be functionally obsolete; therefore, it has been scheduled to be replaced. The Study Area for the project will be centered on the bridge and measure about 200 feet wide (100 feet to either side of the centerline) and about 0.26 mile long (roughly 620 feet from either end of the bridge). Overall, the Study Area will encompass about 281,059 square feet (6.45 acres), inclusive of the existing roadway and structure to be replaced. SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed the subject project and determined: � There are no National Register listed or eligible ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present within the project's area of potential effects. (Attach any notes or documents as needed) ❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations were required for this project. � Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources. ❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources considered eligible for the National Register. ❑ All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project. Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions: This project was accepted on Friday, October 14, 2016. A map review and site file search was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on Monday, October 17, 2016. No archaeological surveys have been conducted along this particular stretch of SR 1114 (Peach Orchard Road), and no archaeological sites have been recorded within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed project. Digital copies of HPO's maps (Franklinton and Louisburg Quadrangles) as well as the HPOWEB GIS Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) were last reviewed on Wednesday, November 2, 2016. There are no known historic architectural resources located within or adjacent to the Study Area for which intact archaeological deposits would be anticipated within the footprint of the proposed project. In addition, topogaphic maps, historic maps (NCMaps website), USDA soil survey maps, and aerial photographs "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT " form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 1 of 6 Project Tracking No.: 16-10-0010 were utilized and inspected to gauge environmental factors that may have contributed to historic or prehistoric settlement within the project limits, and to assess the level of modern, slope, agricultural, hydrological, and other erosive-type disturbances within and surrounding the archaeological APE. As stated in the Survey Required Form, "Although this is a State-funded project, a Federal permit will be required. Permanent and/or temporary utility and/or drainage easements will not be necessary. The need far additional ROW was not speciiied; however, the size of the Study Area will capture any possible impacts beyond the NCDOT's existing 60-foot ROW. At this time, we are in compliance with NC GS 121-12a, since there are no eligible (i.e. National Register-listed) archaeological resources located within the project's Study Area that would require our attention. Based on the description of the proposed project, activities may take place beyond the NCDOT's existing 60-foot ROW along SR 1114 (Peach Orchard Road). From an environmental perspective, the Study Area falls within a rural environmental setting on the northeastern edge of the North Carolina Piedmont Plateau, and is composed of two (2) soil types: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0-3% slopes, frequently flooded (ChA) and Wedowee sandy loam, 6-10% slopes (WeC). Most of the Study Area is considered a flood hazard and consists of somewhat poorly drained soils (i.e. ChA) with soils located on sloping topography (i.e. WeC) to either side of the drainage. Typically, preservation of intact archaeological resources would not be anticipated under such environmental conditions. However, a small portion of the Study Area consists of a fairly level upland setting composed of well-drained soils and may be considered to have a moderate to high potential for containing intact archaeological materials. Such an area will require formal archaeological investigations. Other than the aforementioned topographical situation, a review of current LiDAR data shows no other noticeable landscape features within the Study Area that would be worthy of reconnaissance or investigation; remnants of previous roadbeds or crossings of Cedar Creek may be present, but would not be considered historically signiiicant. In fact, this location was labelled as Greens Bridge in both the 1907 Franklin County Map and the 1931 Soil Survey Map. Both graphics depict a sharper alignment to SR 1114 to the north, suggesting a level of disturbance in the Northwest Quadrant of the Study Area. The Office of State Archaeology (OSA) has reviewed three (3) projects within the vicinity of Bridge No. 20 for environmental compliance, including two disaster debris sites (ER 08-0426). No archaeological surveys were recommended for either location. NCDOT's Archaeology Group has reviewed several nearby transportation-related projects for environmental compliance under the Programmatic Agreement (PA) with the State Historic Preservation Office (NC-HPO) (see the following PAs: 11-OS-0005, 15-OS- 0014, 13-02-0027, 15-09-0003, 10-02-0089, 10-02-0088, and 12-11-0004). Based on soil conditions and overall topography, archaeological surveys were not recommended for any of these projects, except for the road improvements along SR 1211 (W. River Road), the permit areas along affected fairly level upland settings similar to that at Bridge No. 20. Based on the information provided, an archaeological survey is, therefore, recommended for the proposed project. A visual inspection of the entire Study Area should be conducted, followed then by systematic archaeological excavations within areas of moderate to high archaeological probability. None of the property within the Study Area that requires further investigation is owned by the State of North Carolina so a State Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) permit should not be necessary. Should the description of this project change or design plans be made available prior to construction, additional consultation regarding archaeology will be required." Field investigations for the replacement of Bridge No. 20 on SR 1114 (Peach Orchard Road) occurred on Friday, November 4, 2016, and were comprised of a pedestrian survey and systematic shovel testing to locate and assess potentially signiiicant archaeological remains that could be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project as described above. The entire extent of the project's Study Area was visually inspected in order to determine the need for excavations. One (1) transect consisting of three (3) shovel tests was positioned within the Northeast Quadrant in order to investigate a high spot or knoll overlooking Cedar Creek. One (1) shovel test was positioned in the Northwest Quadrant in order to investigate a subtle ridgeline, entering the Study Area from the north. One (1) transect of two (2) shovel tests was positioned in the Southeast Quadrant in order to investigate a relatively level T1 stream terrace. No shovel testing occurred within the Southwest Quadrant because of its low-lying and somewhat poorly drained soil "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 2of6 Project Tracking No.: 16-10-0010 conditions. All shovel tests were negative for cultural material; no archaeological resources were recovered. According to the Soil Survey for Franklin County (2004), the typical profile for the soil type to be encountered (i.e. Wedowee sandy loam [WeC]) is as follows: Surface Layer - 0-5 inches, yellowish brown sandy loam; Subsoil - 5-10 inches, yellowish sandy clay loam, 10-18 inches, brownish yellow clay loam with red mottles, 18-23 inches, brownish yellow sandy clay with red mottles, 23-35 inches, brownish yellow clay loam with red and yellowish red mottles; Underlying Material - 35-40 inches, multicolored sandy clay loam saprolite, 40-62 inches, multicolored sandy loam saprolite. Based on these descriptions, the surface layer within the Northeast and Northwest Quadrants has succumbed to erosion revealing the subsoil layers as the first strata encountered. Both northern quadrants are much higher in elevation and would be mare susceptible to erosion than the rest of the Study Area. Shovel Tests 5 and 6 in the Southeast Quadrant, however, revealed a much more intact and undisturbed stratigraphic profile although no archaeological resources were recovered. A field access road bisects the Southeast Quadrant, leading to an open field beyond the limits of the Study Area. Please refer to the Shovel Test Discussion for detailed descriptions (soil strata, color, and texture) of each shovel test. As a result of this investigation, no archaeological sites were documented within the project's Study Area. Additional fieldwork within the Study Area is unlikely to provide any significant or substantial amounts of archaeological data. Therefore, it is recommended that additional archaeological work should not be required. A finding of "No NRHP-Eligible or -Listed Archaeological Sites Present" within the Study Area is considered appropriate in association with the proposed project. However, should the description of this project or design plans change prior to construction, then additional consultation regarding archaeology may be required. If archaeological materials are uncovered during proj ect activities, then such resources will be dealt with accarding to the procedures set forth for "unanticipated discoveries," to include notification of NCDOT's Archaeology Group. Shovel Test Discussion: STP 1: 0-6cmbs, lOYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; 6-15cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy clay loam; 15-20cmbs, 7.SYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; no cultural material. STP 2: 0-8cmbs, lOYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; 8-18cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy clay loam; 18-23cmbs, 7.SYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; no cultural material. STP 3: 0-106cmbs, lOYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; 10-19cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy clay loam; 19-27cmbs, 7.SYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; no cultural material. STP 4: 0-8cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy clay loam; 8-15cmbs, 7.SYR 5/6, sandy clay loam; no cultural material. Stratum I that was apparent in STPs 1-3, which were located in an wooded area, is not present in the NW quadrant, which consists of an open pasture. STP 5: 0-27cmbs, lOYR 5/6, sandy loam; 27-45cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy loam; no cultural material. Although soil type was supposed to be the same as in the first 4 shovel tests, the clay content was non- existent and the overall depth of the top 2 soil strata was greater. STP 6: 0-26cmbs, lOYR 5/6, sandy loam; 26-40cmbs, lOYR 5/8, sandy loam; no cultural material. Although soil type was supposed to be the same as in the first 4 shovel tests, the clay content was non- existent and the overall depth of the top 2 soil strata was greater. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: � Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info Signed: / � c� � ��°� � Photos ❑Correspondence November 7, 2016 NCDOT ARCHA�Q�LOGIST Date .. __ OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT" form for Minor Transportakon rru�e��d as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 3 of 6 Project Track:rr�g No.: 16-10-0010 Figure 1: Franklinton, NC (USGS 1978). Figure 2: Soil map, Franklin Cotmty, Nortl� Carolina (Davis et al. 1931) (online resource: http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collectio�z/��cmaps/id/1146/rec/18, last accessed 7 Nov 2016). "NO N.4TION�IL REG/STER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCLIAEOLOG/CAL SITES PRESENT " form %or� Mi�ior� Transyortation Projects aa� Qiralified rn the 1007 Pro�rammsaXic Agreement. 4of6 Project Track:rr�g No.: 16-10-0010 Figure 3: Franklin County, North Carolina (NC Geological & Econoinic Survey 1906-1907) (online resource: http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdin/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/1138/rec/10, last accessed 7 Nov 2016). Photo 1: Northeast Quadrant, looking East. "NO N.4TION�IL REG/STER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCLIAEOLOG/CAL SITES PRESENT " form %or� Mi�ior� Transyortation Projects aa� Qiralified rn the 1007 Pro�rammsaXic Agreement. 5 of 6 Project Track:rr�g No.: 16-10-0010 Photo 2: Northwest Quadrant, looking East. Photo 3: Southeast Quadrant, looking South. "NO N.4TION�IL REG/STER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCLIAEOLOG/CAL SITES PRESENT " form %or� Mi�ior� Transyortation Projects aa� Qiralified rn the 1007 Pro�rammsaXic Agreement. 6 of 6 ' -rf� i71r � i I p � _ . � y �� p'�`�L� � i�� . . . . �_, 1 �+,�" �t� . ��'� '� w; '� , � R � .�.� � 1, � " s , _ , �. k� . � �� l � 'Vit I� 'y� �'{' ` ,�� 1� , I 'Sy'�l'� � 'F.' ( � ' . V � � �.,'�. .r � �4 �( '•j �g �r' �a�.�� , r . - ,. a� � �� "� 4 F �T- . � •: , �k. � + � , g � � �"� � �. �:` �� F V' _ �:. r� ',� �� l y){� -�� l�a� fs� j I` � � ,�'��+• .•�J�p �,, � � �F ��r I,� i'',-! �� rt _ {'y 1 $��,�� --'l� d� . , i.{� �� 9 r `e` '�{�-, �. �� 1,,_,f� ,�' � 1 � I. , �-� � - I ' �'� ,; . � P�F� ��{" � L �� +l y� e, �� 'k �� .�tl��.�� i�� :� �it�Ii:l; �` .,:. } ��`�!{�; �� _ � ' , ��` �°.. ° � ��; t �� ' �itb}A,,. � ��i��. ��. S \ � w, � ' ,.� _ • 1 I ' ..�a a � '�� .. 2 �., • ^, � . 'i � ¢v � ,�' � �, } � J. �� : tit' � , L � � ' � ` �� ,� J t, � / ._' . / „: � ` �:. ' � �%`� � s�`' � `� , � � �x i � , '� �� - � r• <,_. `�, �' 1 �� ti'� `' fi'°'S� ,- • PA 16-10-0010 . �� r D �'�� ,�r j� Replace Bridge No. 20 on a .Cs ' 6 f' �, {' SR 1114 (Peach Orchard Rd) over , �"; a, - ti a Cedar Creek in 1� � , ;� �. _ , Franklin County, NC �� py i . -� � - � `S � ,�i 4 l ;.`.:;y., • Negative STP 1 � � � �� •fi �, . _ . " ! �'� Q 776P5R69 StudyArea �'• �.. , ';,�,� ,, : _ - �� . ♦ �F_ � v _,ti "r+ Q NCHPOpoints �. 'r ��.� r ��;_�. i ' .r� � i ,� , � � � ' r•s� Cemetery � .-,�� y .�;�r.+ �+f] ��'Kt�' _ � FranklinCo,Contour_002 � � , _ - . - HYARUT , � � ' � � ''�1...- . . r -- � " � � ' � Named streams .. � � �i t , .- r �.. _ � ' �� Streets � � t,1�,� • , ' , �, IIy ' oFranklin Parcels .� ��. � �'. � 7 , �,.(�� . _ � � � % mapfldhazar � �� t,�� {1 �M.. .. � .� I �� p� � � . y 'L�ti . � � Local_�istrict_Boundaries 3 '� �,��,� ¢ � � � �� u NCHPO_NR_SL_DOE_Boundaries �� { '" � _��' j'� Franklin co. soils .. ", w 7-K_ . . � So�nrE � ii Dig~ - � CNES AIP�U , DS 0 45 90 180 270 360 � � �- Feet t; IGN. IGI�, swisst