Back to top

Archeological Survey of Riverwalk South Rotary Park to Fort Benning

Author(s)
Report Number
1193
Year of Publication
2015
County
Abstract

Between November 23 and December 6, 2014, Brockington and Associates, Inc. (Brockington) conducted an intensive Phase I Archaeological Survey and systematic Metal Detection Survey of the proposed Marsh Hen Trail improvements on Tybee Island in Chatham County. Survey investigations were carried out for the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) while under a contract with Thomas & Hutton Engineering Co.

The proposed project would involve improvements to the Marsh Hen Trail on Tybee Island, Chatham County, Georgia. The project represents the construction of an 8-foot walkway along the north side of US 80 on the historic Tybee Railroad rail bed and road shoulder from the entrance of the Battery Park Subdivision east to Byers Street. An add alternate portion of the project would include the development of an 8-ft (2.4-m)-wide walkway along the north side of US 80 on the historic Tybee Railroad rail bed from the entrance of the Battery Park Subdivision west to US 80. The total length of the project would be 5,975 ft (approximately 1.13 miles).

In summation, the Phase I Archaeological Survey and Metal Detection Survey did not locate remnants of the Union mortar batteries historically situated in the vicinity of the ESC. Due to the lack of Civil War era artifacts and landscape features that could be identified as battery earthworks, it is probable that construction processes involved in the creation of the Tybee Railroad rail bed destroyed any remnants of Civil War batteries in the area. Brockington identified 12 isolated finds within the APE. Additionally, one small subsurface Historic site (9CH1372) was identified within the ESC. The isolated finds are likely associated with the historic Tybee Railroad rail bed and more recent use of the area as a trash dump. 9CH1372 is a late nineteenth- to early twentieth-century artifact scatter. Brockington recommends that none of these archaeological occurrences are eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. No additional archaeological investigation is recommended.