Agenda - 10-03-2006-9d - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

MANAGENIENT SLTMMA.RY Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) conducted an intensive archaeological investigation of the Southern Human Services Campus {SFISC), located an approximately 34 acres in Orange County, North Carolina, in August 200G. This investigation was conducted for the Orange County to comply with local. policies on County development projects. All fieldwork was designed to comply with guidelines established by the Office of the Secretary of the Interior of the United States. Orange County has proposed to construct additional improvements to the SHSC off Homestead Road, just north of the town limits of Chapel Hill in Orange County, North Carolina. Orange County leas requested that an intensive archaeological survey be conducted in -the areas of proposed ground distuxbance (Areas 1 and 2). In addition, it was requested that ESI conduct a limited field reconnaissance of the remainder of the parcel where no construction is currently planned (Areas 3 and 4}. Background research was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA). Field investigations consisted of.pedestrian investigation and shovel testing. .Areas of clear visibility, including eroded ar exposed ground surfaces and unpaved roads within the survey area were inspected far historic structures, artifacts, and other signs of prehistoric or historic cultural activity: .All shovel tests (n=25) were approximately 30 centimeters in diameter and dug to sterile subsoil; no shovel testing was conducted outside the project area. Intensive archaeological investigation of Areas 1 and 2 recorded one archaeological site (31 OR584* *; Table A). This late nineteenth to early twentieth century domestic site yielded few artifacts and expressed little archaeological integrity. It is xecomrnended not eligible for the National Register. No further work is necessary in Areas 1 and 2, and it is recommended that work be allowed to proceed in these areas without concern for impacts to significant cultural resources. Table A: Summary of Site Data Site Number Cultural Affiliation Site Type Recommendations 310R584** Late 19~'-Early2d~`Cen. Domestic Not Eligible-NFW* *Na Further Work A reconnaissance of Areas 3 and 4 found that these areas Have a low potential to contain significant cultural resources. A pedestrian inspection of these areas did not observe any cultural resources on the ground surface. Limrted shovel testing did not yield any cultural materials and zevealed a thin, partially eroded soil profile. Areas 3 and 4 also encompass previously developed areas, moderately steep slopes, and the headwaters of ephemeral drainages, landforms that do not typically contain significant archaeological sites. It is recommended that no additional archaeological investigations occl~x in Areas 3 and 4, based on the results of the reconnaissance investigation.