Second Addendum to Phase I Archaeological Resource Survey for the Proposed State Route 11 Bridge Replacement Over the Apalachee River, Walton and Barrow Counties, Georgia

In December 2018, VHB conducted a second addendum Phase I archaeological resource survey in support of the State Route (SR) 11 bridge replacement over the Apalachee River in Walton and Barrow Counties, Georgia. The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) proposes to replace the existing SR 11 bridge (PI No.: 132981) which is located between the cities of Bethlehem and Monroe, Georgia, and crosses over the Walton and Barrow County line at the Apalachee River. An archaeological survey performed in support of this bridge replacement effort was originally done in 2004, followed by a 2015 addendum survey (Perrine 2015; Smith 2004a). The overall project description from the 2015 addendum has not changed and still ntails the construction of a new 260-foot length bridge with 40 feet of clear width, with segments along Emmett Doster Road and Tanners Bridge Road. The proposed typical section would consist of two 12-foot lanes, one in each direction, with 4-foot paved shoulders. The existing right-ofway (ROW) along SR 11 is 100 feet in width. The proposed ROW would vary between 110 and 180 feet. The work for this survey was conducted in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800).

Since the time of the 2015 addendum survey, the Final Field Plan Review (FFPR) identified two remnant parcels that will be acquired as part of project implementation. Since no previous archaeological survey has covered the remnant parcels entirely, additional archaeological survey coverage in the form of this second addendum was required. In addition to effecting complete archaeological coverage of the two remnant parcels, the current survey sought to augment the archaeological survey coverage within the boundaries of Site 9WN168 (William Harris Farmstead), an archaeological resource with boundaries extending into the current Area of Potential Effects (APE). An intact nineteenth-century historic farm, the William Harris Farmstead overlaps the southern end of the project area, south of the Apalachee River. The site was nominated for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 1977 and listed in 1980. The site was recorded in 2018, after the previous survey efforts for the project. In addition, this Second Addendum survey also planned to continue delineation of Site 9BW123, a resource within an unknown boundary previously identified during the 2015 addendum, which likely extended eastward into one of the remnant parcel properties (Perrine 2015).

The 2015 addendum defined the APE for this project as limited to the existing ROW and the additional required ROW, described in-part above (Perrine 2015). For the current survey, the 2018 APE represents the current footprint in its entirety, including the remnant parcels and all areas of change since the last survey. The addendum survey areas have been defined as the property limits associated with the two remnant parcels, and those portions of 9WN168 that are located within the APE. As the original 2004 survey for this project occurred before GDOT’s Extended Survey Corridor (ESC) requirement, an ESC was not included as part of either the 2015 addendum survey or this second addendum survey. During the current survey, 88 shovel tests were excavated within the addendum survey area. Field conditions encountered within the remnant parcel properties was largely consistent with either maintained landscaping (Parcel 2) or a mixed hardwood forest environment (Parcel 1) just north of the Apalachee River. The survey environment encountered within the boundaries of 9WN168 within the 2018 APE consisted of mowed grass consistent with a maintained ROW. Overall, shovel test profiles were relatively shallow and typically consisted of 20 centimeters (cm) of dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy loam overlying reddish brown (5 YR 5/4) clay loam. As a result of the current survey, six shovel tests were positive for cultural material and have expanded the known boundaries of Site 9BW123, located at the southwest corner of Parcel 2. The shovel testing effort designed to augment the previous archaeological survey coverage within 9WN168 was negative for cultural material or features.

Site 9BW123 was originally recorded as a trash-scatter associated with an historic occupation from the mid- to late-twentieth century. Artifacts recovered during the 2015 addendum were a mix of ceramics, colored glass, aluminum, and various ferrous material, including wire nails. Historic topographic maps and aerial photography indicate a structure was present at 9BW123 from between 1940 and 1970 which corresponds to the general age of the artifact assemblage recovered (Perrine 2015). As a result of the current survey, six positive shovel tests have increased the dimensions of Site 9BW123 by 63 meters (m) in length and 104 m in width. Due to the limits of the 2018 APE, the extent of the site could not be fully delineated to the east and south. Artifacts recovered during the revisit were similar to those found during the Perrine 2015 identification survey and consisted of 30 historic artifacts (i.e. glass, ceramics, iron nails) and one precontact quartz lithic flake. No features were identified. The revisit to 9BW123 confirmed the site as a light density, historic trash-scatter primarily associated with a mid- to late-twentieth century occupation. The recovered single quartz lithic flake represents an isolated precontact find. Based on a review of historic aerials and historic U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, the site area was subject to ground-disturbing agricultural activities, structure demolishing, roadway clearing, and grading between the 1930s and 1980s. Furthermore, within the past year, a preexisting modular home was also removed/demolished. The current site is maintained through cultivated landscaping and planting. Visual ground inspection of clay substrates present at the surface, as well as historic aerial reviews indicates that past grading for residential landscaping, and structure removal has compromised the stratigraphic integrity of the deposits present at 9BW123. Coupled with the low artifact density, diversity, and lack of features, the portion of 9BW123 identified within the 2018 APE lacks significant data potential; however, since the boundaries of 9BW123 could not be delineated beyond the limits of the 2018 APE, the overall NRHP eligibility of the site under Criterion D remains unknown. The unknown portions of 9BW123 should be considered an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) and demarcated with orange barrier fencing (OBF) along the 2018 APE for the length of the site.

The revisit to 9WN168 within the 2018 APE did not reveal any cultural material or features, either above or below the surface. Shovel testing within the 2018 APE area of the site revealed a mottled and disturbed stratigraphy consistent with Urban land soil matrices. This portion of the site within the 2018 APE lacks significant deposits or features and integrity. As the overall site is considered eligible under Criterion D, the portions of the site located outside of the 2018 APE should be considered an ESA and demarcated along the 2018 APE for the entire length of the site. The effects of PI 132981 to the William Harris Farmstead as a historic property have been evaluated in an Assessment of Effects (AOE) document and an addendum AOE (GDOT 2006, 2016). The original AOE had an Adverse Effect finding for the William Harris Farmstead; however, that finding was reversed to “No Adverse Effect” after design changes moved the proposed location of the bridge from the west side of the existing bridge to the east side. The No Adverse Effect finding received SHPO concurrence on February 22, 2016. There have been no design changes within the William Harris NRHP boundary since that time. The effects of the project on 9WN168, or the archaeological components of the William Harris Farmstead, were not assessed in the addendum AOE because it had not yet been formally designated as an archaeological site; however, VHB recommends that the No Adverse Effect finding remains valid, since there are no significant deposits or features related to site 9WN168 within the APE and there have been no changes to design in the area of the resource.