The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20190175 Ver 1_AR15-02-0030noeligiblesites_revised_20190207Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES � °�� ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ��^�� PRESENT FORM �! �� ' �, p�_�„ �'�; �. . =_ a ��°'�a This form onl ertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this ro ect. It is not F;; �.�`�'� �'a �`�y�,�• Y l� I� J Y�� ` valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the ��_a� Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No. WBS No B-4427 17BP.2.R.89 County: Document: Beaufort Minimum Criteria F.A. No: na Funding: � State ❑ Federal Federal Permit Required? � Yes ❑ No Permit Type: NWP# 3 or 14 Project Description: The project calls for the replacement of Bridge No. 6 on SR 1422 (Market Sb^eet) over Big Swamp in Beaufort County. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the project is defined as an 1, 000 foot (304.80 m) long corridor running S00 feet (152.40 m) north and S00 feet south along Market Street from the center of Bridge No. 6. The corridor is approximately 200 feet (60.96 m) wide extending 100 feet (30.48 m) on either side of the road from its present center. The APE has been revised from its original length of 800 feet (243.84 m) to the current I,000 foot corridor. 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. "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transportakon Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programma[ic Agreement. 1 of 9 Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions: Bridge No. 6 is located north of Washington and west of Pinetown in the northwestern section of Beaufort County, North Carolina. The project area is plotted in the southeastern corner of the Old Ford USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle (Figure 1). A map review and site file search was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on February 19, 2015. No previously recorded archaeological sites are recorded within the APE or a mile of the bridge. According to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office online data base (HPOWEB 2015), there are no known historic architectural resources within the APE that may yield intact archaeological deposits. Topographic maps, USDA soil survey maps, aerial photographs (NC One Map), historic maps (North Carolina maps website), and Google Street View application were examined for information on environmental and cultural variables that may have contributed to prehistoric or historic settlement within the project limits and to assess the level of ground disturbance. An archaeological field reconnaissance was carried out on March 11, 2015, to evaluate the project area. Bridge No. 6 and SR 1422 cross Big Swamp north to south. The swamp drains to the southwest into the Old Ford Swamp. These waterways are part of the Tar-Pamlico drainage basin. The APE is situated in a swamp/floodplain that was covered with standing water at the time of the investigation (Figures 2-4). Ground disturbance is minimal with the road elevated on an earthen embankment in order to alleviate flooding. The APE is composed of no more than two soil types according to the USDA soil survey map (see Figure 2). Most of the swamp/floodplain is made up of Muckalee loam (Me). This series is nearly level, poorly drained, and subject to frequent flooding. At the southern end of the APE and covering only a minimal area is Lynchburg iine sandy loam (Ly). This series has a slope of less than 1 percent and is somewhat poorly drained. Typically, both series are unlikely to yield any significant cultural resources associated with early settlement activities due to being persistently wet. A review of the site files shows that B-4427 was previously reviewed by OSA in 2005 (ER OS-0861; Attachment 1). An archaeological survey was recommended since the bridge is located in a similar setting as other sites recorded during the US 17, Washington Bypass Project (TIP R-2510). However, no previously known sites or archaeological surveys have been carried out in the vicinity of the Bridge No.6. Lastly prior to fieldwork, a historic map review was conducted. Most early maps from the 18th and 19th centuries provide only general details concerning the region illustrating just major roads, settlements, and drainages. The 1818 Clements and Price map of The Country Between the Roanoke and Pungo River is one of the earliest maps in which an approximate location for the project could be determined (Figure 5). This map identifies Big Swamp as Old Ford or Beaverdam Swamp. No roads or structures are illustrated near the current bridge site. Later maps from the early 201h century such as the 1903 USGS Chocowinity topographic and 1908 Beaufort County Geological maps do depict a road similar to Market Street with a crossing at or near the current bridge (Figures 6 and 7). Also, Big Swamp on these maps is referred to as Singleton Swamp, and all structures are well away from the APE. Subsequent 20th century maps provide no additional information. As a result, it is unlikely for any deposits associated with former significant structures to be encountered. The archaeological field reconnaissance of Bridge No. 6 consisted of a surface inspection. No subsurface testing was carried out since standing water covered the APE. According to aerial photographs and Lidar images, this is typical for the project area. No mill dams or earthworks were observed in the swamp, which are the most common features in this setting. "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELLGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transporlation Projects as Qualified ln the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 2 of 9 Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised The archaeological investigations for the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 6 show that no significant archaeological sites are within the APE. Saturated soils cover the project area, which are not suitable for early settlement activities. Features that are found in poor wet soils such as a mill dam were not observed. As a result of the current investigation, no further archaeological work is required for replacement of Bridge No. 6 in Beaufort County. However, additional work might be required should design plans change to encompass property outside of the currently defined APE. The proposed replacement of Bridge No. 6 was resubmitted in May 2017 with an increase in the projects length. Although new property was included the results of the investigation remain unchanged. The addition of 100 feet to either end still falls on poorly drained and saturated soils. No significant archaeological resources will be encountered by this project expansion. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: � Map(s) Signed: �. ❑ Previous Survey Info C. Damon Jones NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST � Photos ❑Correspondence 5/11/17 Date "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELLGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transporlation Projects as Qualified ln the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 3 of 9 Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised � �_. '-� - �~ �_ �: _� � s � �A�� .._- � r_� _-_�-.. 'r - r� �., j �_ . w`T �'� �� :,� i ' as� ' 'p _F',�� • -- " f. � � j �_�� _�, ! - . M..;._`�ti, jl ( �I f � l l/.•' z� �„•,/ y'ti 1 ' -" I �} �r � % _+1 � f. � f r �� . � th.. �i ~�� I,ll��'�. � {� �_y -� � --- - -�.� 'c = �-�_ i � � � � � �- !,�� r �; �-r I � � ��..� � � _ _t� L� �� I 1 ��5 •� � � { a��_ti . � l \��. ` � �"-�s,, � �_-_" � s �� . � . �. — - ---�.._ . �� q .�--' � �Y��•.� r l� �r� �` ti SlJ� � ,4 � � � 5 I�/f �'+�F �`:�f � - �r�hn� � * v � � ` �'� �:' ! �� . * h I - ��-� -_ -_ _ ' . � � ':� ��.,�� '.�'�-� �' � � , , _ � � � ��-- �= -=�, � � . � - _ �_ --. � � , � � � � _� ,; � �:r�� .� �� J�--•---- -��• i Ik r r,� � 4�1 4��1�'y � � � 4� r.__ y � - - __ `-- y �� 'i � s �` � � � _.. � : z: ..— - �```; y��i � �-� 4 � :4 � ; �� __� dn�. � ; �^ I f _ �� .... � 1 �:� � �ti�_ f�-� � �� ` '� 5 �-� � � �� {,'�� /{ r} � , - —�� ' � 5 � y � •4 � � --` `� -�� 1..�_}�J`, L L / �+-y L �~ _p��~_} I�I�.-}S� 5�\._` fL�1%V'� -�m� / Ll � - { L�.�J ~�k1�� — k� ' �� 1 _ �}__" ...� � �-� - \.. L l'';� J � ` Bridge 6 _ _ � �•� -�°� -,. : - ' , -� � � � _� .",.� �� } -- APE{Fted) �� " .�:.=�� eL�., ==�,��y.�.�� _- �` . � _ _..,� �— � _ - _ a. _ - .,�.,� _ ��. 2l.��l.a,� _ , """ � - = _ � - _ - "' _ - - r I "" .. ' . ,,.x'�+y� �.,. � �� „ - �' �- � ., -�_ �ti�.,-•��~- -;.ti"t - � . r_�-�"`: � � `_' '� l , .r+;:. �'"` = _� ''• � _ _ . - ..__ �...`! , .�- �-a.-.. � _- - — _`.�_ .] f� � - � ' ~�'�f�`-� -- � . � y �� . _ -� ,_ p:• _ �� - _��. �;�� /' � � �_� �i _ �e �.�..� � � ,�� U. � _` �! �� _�� ,-� i `� 1 � ' � ' � _ _ �` r'-\ ! { • - � 1 � � �� "_ �'� �� _. �-. �3�- `�i ' 1 .-�1 � •� �.i l� ' `�.1 ttii {�' B�"I� f` ��, �5 �l ,1 �� r � � �2''' � \ � � . ti � � � J �� , � � _ _ � -• � I ��~� ��*� ' � � �� y l � 5,��\.�'�` �I �. � � ,, � � ' . � t� ',��_� . � � �.� { 1.-�'�? � � - � . � J . ��1 �.4� _ / �� c-- / � ,.. �� , �3ala. � I -�_ � : ��,�'� - y � �° �'-� t. � ` � �i:�. , � -;�. ��.�y J t.,. - _ { + , �_� '�, �`� , . _ ,� � �.�=� '� -4 - �-�.:.,. -. ti `�_ �=�`�_ --- �w.�.�F ; l - • ._ � � , � �`t' _ �.. — � � — -�� ,,�� '� ;� _ �,,. = '� ? ' � ' +�7 i �, `, � u ;.�--� , y`- ...� .�._ � i 4 i� � - � �_� �;ts�a; , �� '•,__, �� 1 T��- � �`,`��'�-- ��, �! �' .� • �s .'`� �L�� C,,w_: �� ,. -�. f.+� -w - a � „ , � ��,� � ;r- ' � ,� ��..� ti� L � `� � � '.,- � tt� � _ — � ! • � 1.----_'_ �� 4- � f � } y`� ��'- -° _ �-- � � - f � •'l_ Fo . '._'-...� � � , „_l � J��_ u �'`- . __ .� `��5. �'� ` "� � u N� �f `.~~�y ^ - --~.y� � ,`v � �� - =f� �- ,. ,� i r. ,1 :... _.l..e_ k� , � - " . _w' t ,„ �' I '� _ . � 1_._ ..� -� x 4_' . � �r � -I�� r� �� c�' �`J �' � r� W•f �,��I I �_.r� �I _ ' � �� I *-y== - Y �� - _ �r' �� J�'��lz\`1 �� 5 }_ I � ... - ��,� .,.��'� C% ' � t.` �`� �'--3 r.�_ -..._.�_ -�---- ��--- - - ,.. ,ti ` �i �.- -- �_�-.��-�- � � 0 1 � Miles � � 0 1,000 Seau{ort �aurrty Meters S Figure 1. Topographic Setting of the Project Area, Old Ford (1979), NC, USGS 7.S Topographic Quadrangle. "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELLGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transporlation Projects as Qualified ln the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 4 of 9 k�I 1 j � �. � - f �' f �ji � + * � � � • 1 1 � � � � � , " � � � - ��i J � t � �� ! ~ f • r ! � :_ � ; - f j� i ' � �� ; 1x � �� i: ; 1 � � i 1 I �` ` � I � ; �j y i r � �� tr � " � � ' �� r , , ;t : � � � �r � � , � � ! + ' i - , � i �� t � ,. . 4 ' �� 1 � L � t � . 1 �. 1 i Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELLGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transporlation Projects as Qualified ln the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 6 of 9 Figure 3. General view of the northeast quadrant showing standing water, looking north. Figure 4. General view of the southwest quadrant showing standing water, looking south. Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transportakon Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programma[ic Agreement. 7 of 9 Figure 5. The 1818 Clements and Price map of The Country Between the Roanoke and Pungo River showing the approximate location of the project area. Figure 6. The 1903 USGS Chocowinity topographic map showing the location of the project area. Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transportakon Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programma[ic Agreement. 8 of 9 Figure 7. The 1908 Beaufort County Geological map showing the location of the project area. Project Tracking No.: 15-02-0030 Revised iri��.� : _� �," �4G��.�. � .:�'- . Michucl F. Gaaley, Govrsnor Lisbeth C. Svsns, Sccrcruy ]et7rcyf. Cmw, �eFM+�Y �tt�S j�� 1 a, zao� MEMORANI]iJM TD: FIZOM: SUB�JECT: C�avonda L}. I3rown, Praject Planning Enganeer Btidge R,eplacement Planning Uczit Project Dewelopment and En�ronsneatal Analpsis Sranch OFfiCc oF Arcfaivea and I-fistory O'svision aF Hismrical Rcsourccs Davod Bmok, [�ire�tor Peter 5andheck � �� Re�lace Sridge No. G on 5R l 422 over Big Swamp, B-4�27, Beaufort Counry, ER 05-D8G1 T'has�k you fox youz letter vf April �i, 2dQ5, canceming ti�e above project. There are no reevxded archaeological sites witfvn the proje�t boundaries. However, the project axea. has never been systematically surveyed m determine the lacarion ar significance of arehaeological xesouxces. A very high site frequenry is located a s�or# distance upsueam fxom the praposed pxaject atea where LIS 17 rsosses Dld Ford Swamp, These sites were recorded as part of the US 17, Waahingtnn �ypass Ptojecc. Bridge Na. G ss located in a simi�ar setti�ng and should 6e considered u.t an area of high pro�ability for the presence of c�,tural resources. Based on these results we reeamrnend an archaeologi,cal investigatian �e conducted in eoruxeetion rwith the project. We kave determined that the project as propased will not affect any historic structunes. T%e aba�e wmments are made pursuant to Secuan IU6 of the I�Farional Historic Preserv�ation Act and the Ad�isvry Cou�ncil on Hista�c Freservation's Regulations For Campiiance with 5ecsion 1DG codifed at 3G CFR Part 800. Thavk you for yaur cooperation and consideration. If you have questitins conceming the ahovc comment, cantact Renee Gledhill-Earley, envi�anmental review coordirtator, at 919/733-4753. Tn ai.l futur� cox��muriicatiom conceming this project, please cite the a6ove xeferenced Yzacking ntunbei. cc: Mary Pope Ftux, l'�CDC7i' Matt Wilkcxsvn, NCDOT Nntth Carolina Department nf Cultural Resnurces 5tate Fiistoric Preeenration Di�ce Peter& Smd6etk. Adminu[ramx ADMIN[ST[tATiON 5[F7 1J. Slnuni Smr�, Rdngh NC 5Lk7 MclSmitt Centcr, Ralciph NC 27R19-i617 p�ESTpR,�T1DSS 515 N. Iilawc Strcr�, Rdn�e NC i5i7 Mai[ Srrvicr C;cn�rr, Ralci�h NC 27697•ibl'1 SS]RV6Y & PLM1NiIVG S!5 M. Abuns S�ree�, Baleigh. NC idS7 Mxd Sc�ricr Cen�er, RaLeigki NC 27CJ17-1697 Attachment 1. A copy of OSA letter to NC DOT recommending an archaeological survey for B-4427. "NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELLGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL SITES PRESENT" form for the Amended Minor Transporlation Projects as Qualified ln the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. 9 of 9