Back to top

Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Proposed Camp Creek Trade Center, East Point, Fulton County, Georgia

Report Number
7066
Year of Publication
1974
Abstract

URS Corporation conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of the proposed Camp Creek Trade Center Project in Fulton County, Georgia. The goal of this reconnaissance was to evaluate the potential of the property to contain archaeological resources. Background research documented the presence of five previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites within a mile of the project area. A field reconnaissance of the property was conducted on January 19, 2001. Archaeological artifacts or features were observed at four locations during the reconnaissance. Three of these sites were noted in the northeastern comer of the project area, on the northern spur of the main ridge. All three consisted of surface artifacts found in trails recently cleared for geotechnical access. The fourth is an historic period mill site located in the southeastern comer of the project area on the north bank of the eastern tributary creek. The Camp Creek parcel includes terrain with a high probability of containing archaeological sites. This is based on an assessment of environmental features, the presence of documented archaeological sites nearby in similar settings, and the incidental identification of at least four archaeological locales on the property during the pedestrian reconnaissance. The presence of at least four recorded archaeological sites along Camp Creek just downstream from the project area indicates that the floodplains and stream margins within the project area have a high probability of containing additional sites. In addition, a potential historic mill site was identified along a tributary stream within the project area. Sites in these settings are likely to be well preserved within alluvial soils, and as such are most likely to be determined to be significant cultural resources in need of mitigation measures (such as avoidance, protection, or compensatory data recovery excavations). The level to gently-sloping ridges within the parcel are also settings likely to contain archaeological sites, and three sites were in fact observed in these areas during the reconnaissance. Sites in these ridge top settings are more likely to have been previously impacted by farming, logging, and subsequent soil erosion. Sites that have suffered such impacts are less likely to be determined to be significant cultural resources, but this can only be determined after a systematic inventory has been conducted. Areas of steep side slope are not likely to contain intact, significant archaeological sites and do not need to be systematically surveyed. Areas already disturbed by cutting, filling, and grading near the Park Creek Business Center also do not need to be surveyed. We recommend that an intensive archaeological survey be carried out to identify and evaluate additional archaeological sites and evaluate those already discovered.