Back to top

Archaeological Assessment of Projects STP-209-1(1), STP-209-1(2), & BHF-209-1(3), Fayette County

Report Number
10609
Year of Publication
1996
Abstract

"In compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and amendments thereto , projects STP-209- 1(1), (2), and BHF-209-1 (3), Fayette County have been surveyed with respect to archaeological resources, especially those on or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) . The purpose of the survey was to locate, identify and evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources within the proposed projects' area of potential environmental effect. The proposed projects would consist of the widening and reconstruction of SR 74 from SR 85 northerly to approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) north of SR 54. Additionally, proposed project BHF-209-1(3) would construct a new bridge on SR 74 over Flat Creek at a point just north of the existing structure. The existing right-of-way is approximately 30.5 m (100 ft) from SR 85 northerly to Crosstown Road, and 39.6 m (130ft) from that point northerly to the end of the proposed project STP-209-1 (1). The proposed right- of-way for the projects would be variable from 43 to 61 m (141 to 200ft). The total projects ' length would be approximately 12.2 km (7. 6 mi) . An archaeological survey consistent with the proposed right-of-way was conducted for the entire length of the projects' corridor. An archaeological survey (Level III) was conducted in accordance with "GDOT/FHWA Cultural Resource Survey Guidelines" developed by the GDOT Staff Archaeologists in consultation with DNR Historic Preservation Section Staff and concurred in by the Federal Highway Administration and State Historic Preservation Officer. These guidelines provide general survey boundaries and methodological approaches to archaeological surveys based on the type/scope of proposed highway projects and are followed during the initial identification of archaeological resources. No existing or eligible National Register archaeological resources were located within the projects ' area of potential environmental effect. It i s concluded, therefore, that the projects will have no effect upon archaeological resources on or eligible for inclusion in the NRHP provided that the projects conform to that described above."