Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed 16.33 Acre Barrow County Army Reserve Center And Literature Review for 52 Acre Alternate Site near Auburn, Georgia.

On June 11, 2009, Brockington and Associates, Inc. completed a Phase I cultural resources survey at the proposed location of a US Army Reserve Center, southwest of the intersection of Georgia State Route 316 and Bethlehem Road, near Winder, Georgia (referred to as the Preferred Site). The tract consisted of previously affected and eroded upland topography. Conditions within the Preferred Site included previously cleared and graded lands; subsoil was exposed across most of the tract. For this study, the area of potential effect (APE) for archaeology included a highly disturbed 16.3-acre tract in which all construction activity would take place. For architectural resources, the APE was defined as the project tract and its immediate view shed. We observed no properties fifty years of age or older within the APE. This project also included a literature review for a 52- acre site (referred to as the Alternate Site) located on Georgia Highway 8 near Auburn, Georgia.

The cultural resources survey was conducted in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations concerning the management of cultural resources as administered by the Regulatory Program of the US Army Corps of Engineers. Survey work in Barrow County, Georgia was conducted in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended), and 36 CFR Part 800 (Protection of Historic Properties) by personnel qualified under the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (36 CFR Part 61- Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation). All personnel participating in this project are qualified under the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (36 CFR Part 61).

Prior to fieldwork, archival research was conducted at the Georgia Archaeological Site File (University of Georgia, Athens) and Historic Preservation Division (State Historic Preservation Office, Georgia Department of Natural Resources). Our research encompassed one-mile study areas surrounding both the Preferred Site and the Alternate Site. No previously recorded archaeological sites were found within the APE of either the Preferred or Alternate Sites. Two previously identified archaeological sites are present approximately one mile southeast of the Preferred Site (see Figure 4.1). Both sites were recommended as ineligible for possible inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Two National Register of Historic Places districts were noted during background research (see Figure 4.1). The Statham Historic District is located approximately one mile northeast of the Preferred Site and the Auburn Historic District is located approximately three quarters of a mile to the east of the Alternate Site. Neither are within the project APEs.

Field archaeological survey methods primarily involved the visual examination of exposed ground surfaces. Where surface visibility was adequate (at least 75 percent), archaeologists conducted a systematic examination of the ground surface at a 15-meter interval. Additionally, a series of 15 screened shovel tests were excavated across the Preferred Site. No cultural material was encountered in shovel tests or on exposed ground surfaces.

Based on the severely disturbed nature encountered during the field investigation, the Preferred Site exhibits extremely low probability for the presence of significant cultural materials. Extensive earth removal and grading have removed any potential archaeological signatures that may have existed from the Preferred Site. Therefore, Brockington and Associates recommends cultural resources clearance for the Preferred Site. If this Site is not chosen for development, a Phase I archaeological survey is recommended for the Alternate Site. It is also the opinion of Brockington and Associates, based on preliminary plans, that proposed development of either Site will create no visual effect on either of the NRHP listed districts due to distance, the existing vegetation screens, and topography.