Back to top

Section 106 Review TCNS ID 184743 Proposed 310 Foot (Overall Height Including Appurtenances) Self-Supporting Lattice Type Telecommunications Structure Miller Ferry (GA131) Off Rome Road SW Plainville, Gordon County, Georgia ECA Project No. V0830

Report Number
13919
Year of Publication
2019
County
Abstract

Environmental Corporation of America’s (ECA) client, Diamond Towers V, LLC, is proposing to construct a telecommunications facility as described in the following FCC Form 620, New Tower (NT) Submission Packet. ECA understands Diamond Towers V LLC, plans to construct a 320-foot overall height self-supporting lattice telecommunication structure within a 100-foot by 100-foot (30-meter by 30-meter) lease area. The proposed lease area would be accessed via an approximately 1,330-foot long by 30-foot wide (405-meter by 9-meter) access/utility easement and would also contain a separate 583-foot long by 30-foot wide (178-meter by 9-meter) utility easement. 

ECA has identified and evaluated Historic Properties, if any, within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for visual and direct effects as directed in Section VI.D.1 and 2 of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, effective on March 7, 2005. We have found no properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within either APE. Based on our review of the files at Georgia Historic Preservation Office (GA HPD), we identified two resources (Robert Kinman House, Go-138; 36427, and Go-137; 36426) within our ¾-mile APE for visual effects. The University of Georgia’s Natural, Archaeological, and Historic Resources Geographical Information System (GNAHRGIS) identified no additional resources within the ¾-mile APE for visual effects (See Attachment B). No further resources were identified within the Site ID Files, Environmental Review files, Centennial Farm Files, or within the National Register Files. 

Robert Kinman House, Go-138; 36427 is a single-family bungalow house (C. 1939) of no known academic style located on the southwestern side of Kinman Road, 0.6 miles southeast of GA Hwy 53. The resource is located approximately 3,300 feet (1006 meters) northeast of the proposed lease area. SHPO records indicate that the rear of the house was never finished and there is an associated barn in an adjacent field to the west of the house. Based on the dense vegetation, topography, and distance, it is our opinion that the proposed undertaking would not be visible from the resource. Therefore, ECA believes that this proposed telecommunications structure will have no effect on the Robert Kinman House, Go-138; 36427. 

Go-138; 36426 was a single-family pyramid cottage of no known academic style previously located on the northeastern side of Kinman Road, 0.6 miles southeast of GA Hwy 53. However, the resource is no longer standing, having been demolished sometime between 2012 and 2014 (see Attachment B-1b &1c). Therefore, ECA believes that this proposed telecommunications structure will have no effect on the Go-138; 36426. 

Based on ECA’s site visit, historic aerial photographs, and the parcel owner interview, ECA understands that one trailer, one single family home dating to the 1970’s, and a house dating to circa 1910 are present on the parent tract. The house features a hipped metal roof, porches on the western and eastern sides, and a projecting bay window on the southern elevation. The walls of the house are clad in stucco, wood brackets are present under the eaves, and black shutters are retained on the windows. The house is currently abandoned / occupied by squatters so close inspection of the building was not completed by ECA due to safety concerns, but photographs taken of the house at a distance are included in this report. 

Based on a review of historic aerials, the house dating to circa 1910 was likely well-maintained throughout the twentieth century but is now in fair to poor condition after neglect / abandonment. Aerials reveal the gradual encroachment of vegetation around the structure, accelerating after the year 2000. Vines are growing over the exterior of the house at present. Aerials also reveal that several outbuildings that would have been originally associated with the house are no longer extant on the parcel. ECA’s interview with the owner revealed that the house has been gutted internally by looters looking for scrap metal to sell and the well behind the house has also been destroyed. As such, the property does not represent an intact early twentieth century farmstead and does not retain adequate integrity to relay significant historical information. No information was uncovered to suggest the property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history (Criterion A), lives of significant persons (Criterion B), or is likely to yield information important in history or prehistory (Criterion D). Additionally, as described above the existing house does not appear to possess architectural significance or retain enough material integrity to qualify under Criterion C. The landowner, Allen Franklin, also stated that he has plans to demolish the house at a later date. As such, it is the opinion of ECA that the house is not eligible for listing in the NRHP. 

An Archaeological Assessment was conducted within the APE for direct effects. During our database research, we found one previously identified archaeological site (9GO177) and two surveys (6743 and 7299) within our standard 1-mile background research radius but outside the APE for direct effects. Based on our findings, we recommend no further consultation under Section 106 Review of the National Historic Preservation Act for this proposed undertaking. Based on this documentation, prepared in accordance with the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement effective March 7, 2005, ECA believes that this proposed facility would have no effect on any Historic Properties identified in accordance with the NPA. Therefore, we recommend a finding of "No Effect" for the proposed undertaking. 

We are submitting this letter on behalf of Diamond Towers V, LLC to seek concurrence with this finding and to comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requirements as identified in 47 CFR 1.1307. We request your concurrence with our finding. Please contact our office with any questions or comments.