ADDITIONAL PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE UMORE PARK SAND AND GRAVEL MINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA

Similar documents
PW Parkway ES Prince William County, Virginia WSSI #

City of Lockport Historic Resources Survey - Section METHODOLOGY

Attached you will find files containing information on the sites and surveys we have in our database for the location you requested.

4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES

ACTON COMMUNITY WIDE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY. Town of Acton and PAL, Inc.

David Moore, PacifiCorp Cultural Resources Coordinator Denise DeJoseph, Project Archaeologist

Geospatial Data Model for Archaeology Site Data

Appendix I-1: Archaeological Records Search

Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions) Materials (Enter categories from instructions)

COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Management Data Form Rev. 11/10

Project Background. March 9, Commissioners of Public Works 103 Saint Phillip Street Charleston, South Carolina 29203

GIS for the Non-Expert

National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

4.11 CULTURAL RESOURCES

KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open File Report LAND SUBSIDENCE KIOWA COUNTY, KANSAS. May 2, 2007

Valley-Fill Sandstones in the Kootenai Formation on the Crow Indian Reservation, South-Central Montana

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE DCP MIDSTREAM THREE RIVERS PLANT TO CGP 51 PROJECT IN LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS

Archaeological Survey and Assessment of Four Wastewater Interceptor Routes in Garner, Wake Co., N.C. (EPA C )

J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report

Part 1: Buildings to be Demolished. Submitted to

Frequently Asked Questions about MnDOT s Railroad Map Conversion Project

Information for File MVP RMM

Minimum Standards for Wetland Delineations

Historic Cultural Properties Inventory (HCPI) Base Form (FORM 1)

Huron Creek Watershed 2005 Land Use Map

CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL PR OPERTIES, IN C. GALE RANCH

December 13, Kirk Shields Green Mountain Power 163 Acorn Lane Colchester, VT 05446

Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request

Hydraulic Impacts of Limestone Quarries and Gravel Pits. Jeff Green Minnesota DNR-Division of Ecological & Water Resources

THE STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF 1 EVANS AVENUE, PART OF LOTS 2 & 3, CONCESSION 10, TOWNSHI P OF AMARANTH, DUFFERIN COUNTY

Ground Penetrating Radar Survey of a Portion of East End Cemetery, Cadiz, Kentucky

Hennepin GIS. Tree Planting Priority Areas - Analysis Methodology. GIS Services April 2018 GOAL:

Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions) 02G04: Commerce/Trade - tavern 14D09: Transportation automotive service

Hydric Rating by Map Unit Ocean County, New Jersey (Larsen & N New Prospect Jackson Twp., NJ)

Archaeological Monitoring of Land at Seacrest, Cliff Drive, Warden, Isle of Sheppey, Kent

GUIDELINES FOR SITE AND UPDATE FORMS. 1. Site forms in a database format should be filed with the Illinois State Museum (ISM).

Hydrogeological Assessment for Part of Lots 2 and 3, Concession 5, Township of Thurlow, County of Hastings 1.0 INTRODUCTION. 1.

RE: End of Field Letter for the Proposed Milton Mears Farm Road Solar Project, Milton, Chittenden County, Vermont

EXTREMELY FAST IP USED TO DELINEATE BURIED LANDFILLS. Norman R. Carlson, Cris Mauldin Mayerle, and Kenneth L. Zonge

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE EASTHAM STATE PRISON FARM UNIT PROJECT IN HOUSTON COUNTY TEXAS

CITY OF PAPILLION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MAY 27, 2015 AGENDA 2015 ANNEXATION MISC

GIS Tools and Techniques for Environmental Assessment of Pipeline Construction. Erik Danielson February 27, 2007

Introduction. Project Summary In 2014 multiple local Otsego county agencies, Otsego County Soil and Water

Town of Taos Request for Proposal Historic Preservation GIS Geodatabase Project April 2007

Information for File # MMJ; Trunk Highway (TH) 7 / Louisiana Ave. Interchange Project

FUTURE MEANDER BEND MIGRATION AND FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS NEAR RIVER MILES 200 TO 191 OF THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PHASE III REPORT

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

Updating the Urban Boundary and Functional Classification of New Jersey Roadways using 2010 Census data

1.0 PURPOSE AND FORMAT OF THE FINAL EIR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DECLARATION OF TIM MENTZ, SR. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Enhancing Parcel Data In Colleton County. February 10, 2009

Creating A-16 Compliant National Data Theme for Cultural Resources

GIS AND REMOTE SENSING FOR OPEN SPACE PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT

February 14, Dear Mr. Kirchen:

PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE BEMIDJI GENE DILLON UPPER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BELTRAMI COUNTY, MINNESOTA. OSA License No.

Cripps Ranch 76+/- Acres Orchard Development Opportunity Dixon, CA. Presented By:

LiDAR User Data Needs Survey Results

McHenry County Property Search Sources of Information

APPENDIX I - AREA PLANS

An Introduction to Field Explorations for Foundations

Chapter 5 LiDAR Survey and Analysis in

Historic Cultural Properties Inventory (HCPI) Base Form (FORM 1)

BUILDING AND SAFETY FEE SCHEDULE (Effective July1, 2013)

Optimization of Sediment Sampling at a Tidally Influenced Site (ArcGIS)

Producing Chandler Walnut Orchard

SNOW CREW CALL IN SHEET

Field Survey for Laramie Columbine. (Aquilegia laramiensis) In the Rawlins Field Office

GIS-Based Sediment Quality Database for the St. Louis River Area of Concern (AOC): Overview Presentations and Demonstration

Guidance for implementing the Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC) System

Evaluation/Monitoring Report No. 259

Southwest LRT Habitat Analysis. May 2016 Southwest LRT Project Technical Report

Mapping the Badlands. Surveying and GIS Just Got Easier. >> By Deral Paulk, LS

Watershed Modeling Orange County Hydrology Using GIS Data

Carrick Road $798,000

December 16, Mr. Lee Hughes Southwest Florida Water Management District Tampa Service Office 7601 Highway 301 North Tampa, FL 33637

MAPS AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION

DEMING PRECISION BOMBING RANGE (PBR) NO

TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL M E M O R A N D U M. To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 4B10

A Level III Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed Spring Creek Drainage Improvement Project in Lincoln County, South Dakota

Hydric Rating by Map Unit Harrison County, Mississippi. Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MISSOURI STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE (SHPO) ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORDATION

A method for three-dimensional mapping, merging geologic interpretation, and GIS computation

GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA 2016 SAMPLING EVENT HARSHAW CHEMICAL COMPANY FUSRAP SITE

Custom Soil Resource Report for Victoria County, Texas

MINNESOTA DEEP TEST PROTOCOL PROJECT

NC Streambed Mapping Project Issue Paper

Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations in Pennsylvania

New Mexico Register / Volume XVI, Number 15 / August 15, 2005

Using Ground Conductivity as a Geophysical Survey Technique to Locate Potential Archaeological Sites in the Bad Axe River Valley of Western Wisconsin

APPLICATION TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP (FLUM) SMALL SCALE

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Phase II: Evaluation According to National Register Criteria

TAKE ROLL CALL TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS A QUORUM OF MEMBERS PRESENT

Information Paper. Kansas City District. Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project Jim and Olivia Hare Wildlife Area, MO

Electronic Submission Format Guide Anthracite Preparation Plant Permit Application

BROOKINGS May

UAV APPLICATIONS IN ENGINEERING. Presented By Wohnrade Civil Engineers, Inc.

DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES WAYS & MEANS SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES MARCH 2, 2017

5.11 MINERAL RESOURCES

Transcription:

ADDITIONAL PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE UMORE PARK SAND AND GRAVEL MINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ADDENDUM I Submitted to: Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc. Submitted by: The 106 Group Ltd. April 2010

ADDITIONAL PHASE IA ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE UMORE PARK SAND AND GRAVEL MINING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SERVICES, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ADDENDUM I SHPO File No. Pending The 106 Group Project No. 08-15b Prepared by The 106 Group Ltd. for Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc. April 2010 1.0 INTRODUCTION On March 31, 2010, The 106 Group Ltd. (106 Group) conducted additional Phase IA archaeological survey in support of the University of Minnesota Outreach, Research and Education (UMore) Park Sand and Gravel Mining Environmental Review Services (UMore Park) project area. This investigation supplements survey work completed in 2008 and 2009 (Bastis and Wilcox 2009). The survey was conducted under contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) for the University of Minnesota. Since there is currently no federal involvement (e.g., federal permitting and/or funding), the investigation needs only to comply with applicable state mandates governing cultural resources, such as the Minnesota Historic Sites Act, the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act, and the Minnesota Private Cemeteries Act. Therefore, considerations regarding architectural history properties are currently restricted to just those properties within the project area. The University of Minnesota has proposed an expansion to the proposed project area previously reported in 2009 (Bastis and Wilcox 2009). The expanded project area is located in Section 34, T115N, R19W, Dakota County, Minnesota (Figure 1). The expanded survey area is the same as the expanded project area and included all areas where construction or other ground-disturbing activities related to the project might take place within the expanded project area. The objective of the Phase IA archaeological survey was to ascertain whether surface scatters or above-ground features, such as earthworks or abandoned structural foundations, are present within the area, and to identify areas of high potential for buried archaeological resources that may require additional survey. In addition, background research and field survey identified whether there were any previously recorded properties present within the project area that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Should the UMore Park

UMore Park Project Additional Phase IA Archaeological Survey Page 2 project be altered from the present proposal, the survey area will need to be adjusted as appropriate. The Phase IA archaeological survey included a systematic walk-over of the entire expanded project area that was safely accessible at the time of the survey in order to assess the potential for archaeological resources. The expanded survey area was the same as the expanded project area and included approximately 99.5 acres (40.3 hectares). The UTM coordinates (NAD83) of the project area are Zone 15, northwest corner E 492512.3 N 4952209.9, northeast corner: E 493209.2 N 4952199.4, southeastern corner: E 493071.4 N 4951594.3, and southwestern corner E 492511.5 N 4951562.9. All UTM coordinates were obtained electronically through the use of ESRI GIS software. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH On March 25, 2010, prior to fieldwork, background research was conducted using the Minnesota SHPO site files for information on previously identified archaeological sites within one mile (1.6 kilometer [km]) of the project area and on archaeological surveys previously conducted within the project area. In addition, researchers examined historical maps and aerial photographs of the project area. A database query was submitted to Minnesota State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) staff to identify any properties, archaeological or otherwise, within the project area that are listed on the NRHP. 2.2 SURVEY AREA The expanded survey area is the same as the expanded project area which is located in T115N, R19W, Section 34 of Dakota County, Minnesota (see Figure 1). According to current project plans provided by SEH in March of 2010, the expanded project area encompasses 99.5 acres (40.3 hectares). 2.3 FIELD METHODS All portions of the expanded project area that were safely accessible at the time of the survey were subjected to systematic pedestrian surface reconnaissance. Systematic pedestrian surface reconnaissance was conducted to ascertain whether surface scatters or above-ground features, such as earthworks or abandoned structural foundations, are present within the area, and to identify areas of high potential for buried intact archaeological resources. Pedestrian transects were placed 15 m (49 ft.) apart to ensure adequate coverage of the ground surface.

UMore Park Project Additional Phase IA Archaeological Survey Page 3 3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS Research indicated that no archaeological surveys have been conducted within the expanded survey area. Additionally, no archaeological sites have been recorded or reported within one mile of the expanded survey area. 4.0 RESULTS At the time of the current survey, the expanded project area consisted of an agricultural field exhibiting an average of 50 percent surface visibility surrounded by slivers of mixed deciduous and coniferous woodland comprised largely of trees which appeared to have originally been planted in rows. Systematic pedestrian surface reconnaissance was carried out within the expanded project area. Several areas suspected by Dakota County to be dump locations or other areas of contamination were avoided due to safety concerns (Figure 2); however, these areas were observed from adjacent portions of the expanded survey area and do not appear to be likely locations for significant intact archaeological sites. 4.1 PRECONTACT ARCHAEOLOGY There are no natural permanent water sources mapped or visible within the expanded project area. The topography is nearly level to gently rolling with no distinctly prominent areas. The conditions in the expanded project area present a low probability to contain precontact archaeological resources. Additionally, no archaeological materials attributable to the precontact period were observed in the expanded project area during the pedestrian survey. 4.2 POST-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGY An examination of documentation indicated that the southwestern portion of the expanded project area may contain post-contact artifacts and structural foundations related to two historical structures associated with the Gopher Ordnance Works (GOW), which were noted on project data provided by Dakota County (Dakota County 2008). However, the field inspection of this area found that none of these historical features remained extant. Additionally, no archaeological materials attributable to the postcontact period were observed within the expanded project area during the pedestrian survey. The former location of the two GOW buildings in the southwestern portion of the expanded project area is now a small sliver of woodland consisting of both deciduous and coniferous trees apparently planted in rows approximately 20 to 40 years ago based on the age of the trees. The two structures were most likely removed prior to cultivation of the land in preparation for planting trees and it is unlikely that any intact archaeological materials remain. Previous evaluations of the GOW have recommended that it is not eligible for listing on the NRHP due to lack of integrity (Roise and Weber 1993; Sluss and Malmquist 1998; Lauber 2006). In addition, extensive documentation of the site is available, consisting of

UMore Park Project Additional Phase IA Archaeological Survey Page 4 site plans, building photographs, and historical narratives, which as one previous investigator stated, leaves little room for eligibility under criterion D (Sluss and Malmquist 1998). Most archaeological sites are eligible for listing in the NRHP under criterion D. If any intact archaeological deposits remain, which is unlikely, they would likely not provide additional information regarding the GOW (criterion D) that hasn t already been historically documented. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS During the Phase IA archaeological survey for the expanded area of the UMore Park Sand and Gravel Mining Environmental Review Services project no new or previously identified archaeological sites were identified within the expanded project area. Furthermore, no areas were identified as having a high potential for containing buried intact archaeological resources. As a result, the 106 Group recommends no further archaeological investigation prior to development. 6.0 REFERENCES CITED Bastis, Kristen J., and David Wilcox 2009 Phase IA Archaeological Survey for the UMore Park Sand and Gravel Mining Environmental Review Services, Dakota County, Minnesota. The 106 Group Ltd., St. Paul, Minnesota. Submitted to Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul, Minnesota. Dakota County 2008 Gopher Ordnance Works Buildings 1946. GIS Data File, Dakota County, Minnesota. Lauber, J. 2006 A Historical Interpretation and Preservation Plan for UMore Park. Historic Preservation and Community Planning. University of Minnesota. Roise, C. K. and D. Z. Weber 1993 Cultural Resource Survey Dakota County Airport Sites 2, 3, and 6 Volume II: The Built Environment. Hess, Roise and Company, Minneapolis. Prepared for the Metropolitan Airports Commission. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul. Sluss, J. and C. Malmquist. 1998 Phase I Archaeological Investigation of Future County Road 46 (CSAH 46), and Phase II Evaluation of the Gopher Ordnance Works, Dakota County, Minnesota (BRW Report Number 98-03). Unpublished cultural resource survey report, July 1998. On file at the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, St. Paul.

Source: The 106 Group Ltd. UMore Park Sand and Gravel Mining Phase IA Archaeological Survey Dakota County, Minnesota Addendum I 0 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800 Meters Feet 0 5,300 10,600 15,900 1:100,000 Revised Project Area 2010 Expanded Survey Area Map Produced The 106 Group Ltd. - 4/12/2010 Project Location Figure 1

T115 R19 S29 T115 R19 S28 T115 R19 S27 T115 R19 S32 T115 R19 S33 T115 R19 S34 T114 R19 S5 T114 R19 S4 T114 R19 S3 T114 R19 S8 T114 R19 S9 T114 R19 S10 Source: The 106 Group Ltd. UMore Park Sand and Gravel Mining Phase IA Archaeological Survey Dakota County, Minnesota Addendum I 0 200 400 600 800 Meters Feet 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 1:20,000 Map Produced The 106 Group Ltd. - 4/12/2010 Archaeological Results Revised Project Area 2010 Pedestrian Survey Previous Archaeological Survey - See 2009 Report Site of Concern Figure 2