reference: historic and archaeological properties survey · 11/13/2014 · 2003 integrating...

November 13, 2014

Thomas and Hutton Engineering Company

682 Johnnie Dodd Boulevard

Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina 29464

Attention: Mr. Kevin Shoemake, P.E.

Reference: Historic and Archaeological Properties Survey

Hanahan School Sites #1 and #2

Berkeley County, South Carolina

S&ME Project No. 1413-14-160

Dear Mr. Shoemake:

S&ME, Inc. (S&ME), on behalf of Thomas and Hutton Engineering Company, has

completed a Historic and Archaeological Properties Survey (HAPS) of approximately 33

acres north of Williams Lane in Hanahan, South Carolina (Figures 1 and 2). S&ME staff

completed this study in general accordance with S&ME Proposal Number 14-1400740,

dated October 31, 2014, and with the standards and guidelines established in the

Guidelines for Historic & Archaeological Properties Survey Conducted for the Coastal

Zone Management Program (CZMP)’s Coastal Zone Consistency Certification (CZC),

developed by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2012.

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Berkeley County School District is interested in use of the Project Area for development

of a new school. The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control’s

Office of Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) consults with the SHPO concerning

the effect of projects on historic and archaeological sites in South Carolina’s coastal zone.

The goal of the HAPS is to assess the property’s potential for containing significant

resources and to make recommendations regarding additional work or considerations that

may be necessary to address effects that the proposed development may have on

properties that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic

Places (NRHP). This HAPS will serve as part of the due diligence efforts in advance of

future planning and development.

The Project Area consists of an approximately 33-acre tract formed from two parcels

identified by the Berkeley County Tax Assessor as TMS Nos. 259-00-00-104 and 259-

00-00-044. The Project Area is comprised primarily of mixed upland forest with a small

Historic and Archaeological Properties Survey S&ME Project No. 1413-14-160 Hanahan School Sites #1 and #2 November 13, 2014

3

portion of the property being a drainage system that gradually becomes more channelized

prior to flowing off the site and eventually to Goose Creek (Figures 3 and 4).

The Project Area is located in the Lower Coastal Plain physiographic province. The

topography is level, with an elevation of approximately 20 feet above mean sea level

(AMSL). Mixed pines and hardwoods cover the majority of the property. The Project Area

has been impacted by past land uses including silviculture (Figure 4) and the installation

of buried utilities (Figure 5).

The soils consist of moderately well-drained Duplin loamy sand, somewhat poorly-

drained Wahee fine sand, and well-drained Caroline fine sand (Figure 2).

BACKGROUND RESEARCH

As part of S&ME’s study of this property, Sarah Posin, RPA conducted a background

literature review and records search (Figure 6 and Table 1). The area examined was a 0.5-

mile radius around the Project Area. The records consisted of ArchSite (a GIS-based

program containing the location and information about archaeological and historic

resources in South Carolina), the master archaeological site files housed at the South

Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology (SCIAA), and the Finding Aid to

Records of the Survey of Historic Properties, which lists prior cultural resources studies

conducted across South Carolina.

Background research indicated that the Project Area has not been subject to an

archaeological survey and as a result, there are no previously recorded sites within the

boundaries of the property. Two previous surveys (Bailey et al. 2000 and Poplin 1993)

were conducted on property adjacent to and west of the Project Area. One previously

recorded archaeological site (38BK1705) is within 0.5-miles of the Project Area.

Archaeological site 38BK1705 is located 0.47-miles (740 meters) southwest of the

Project Area (Bailey et al. 2000). The site consists of artifacts from the historic period

and was determined not eligible for the NRHP on December 13, 1994.

Table 1. Resources Identified During the Background Research

Resource Identification Component / Time Period NRHP Status

38BK1705 Unknown Historic Not Eligible

The background research also included a review of historic maps. Mills’ Atlas (1825)

identifies Red Bank Road and other major features and settlements in the vicinity, but not

in the Project Area (Figure 7). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

1916 Soils map does not identify the presence of structures or other development in the

Project Area, but it does depict the nearby railroad and the presence of secondary

roadways (Figure 8). The 1979 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Ladson

Quadrangle (Figure 1) depicts structures adjacent to the Project Area and a tertiary

roadway crossing the property from north to south.


4

POTENTIAL FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

In the Coastal Plain of South Carolina, researchers have used various predictive models

to identify areas having a high potential for containing archaeological sites (e.g., Brooks

and Scurry 1978; Cable 1996; Scurry 2003). Recently these models have been revised

based on data from Francis Marion National Forest (O’Donoughue 2008). In general, the

most significant variables for determining site location are distance to a permanent water

source, proximity to a wetland or other ecotone, slope, and soil drainage. Prehistoric sites

tend to occur on relatively level areas with well-drained soils that are within 200 m of a

permanent water source or wetland. Historic home sites tend to be located on well-

drained soils near historic roadways.

The Project Area is located in an upland setting near a historic railroad. Additionally, the

western side of the Project Area is adjacent to a large drainage that would have been at

least, a likely source of water. Based on the setting and its historic location, S&ME

characterized the portions of the Project Area near the road and railroad and along the

tertiary roadway as having a high potential to contain archaeological resources dating to

the historic period. Based on the environmental setting, primarily well-drained soil types,

and proximity to a water source, we characterized the western margin of the Project Area

as having a high potential to contain archaeological remains dating to the prehistoric

period (Figure 9).

FIELD INVESTIGATION

On November 4, 2014, Quinn-Monique Ogden, RPA and Aaron Brummitt, RPA

conducted the fieldwork portion of this study.

Methods The field investigation consisted of a pedestrian reconnaissance of the dirt roads crossing

the tract and other areas with exposed ground surfaces. The majority of shovel test pits

were placed in areas with well-drained soils.

Shovel test pits were approximately 30 cm in diameter and excavated to culturally sterile

subsoil or to a minimum of 80 centimeters below the surface (cmbs) if no artifacts were

recovered. Soil was screened through 0.25-inch hardware cloth. The field crew kept notes

in a weatherproof field journal and recorded field conditions in the Project Area with

digital photographs.

In addition to the archaeological survey, the field crew conducted a limited architectural

survey to determine whether there were previously unrecorded aboveground historic

resources in or adjacent to the Project Area.

Results

The field crew excavated 32 shovel test pits, ranging from 45 to 80 cmbs (Figure 10).

These investigations identified one Isolated Find, a single secondary flake, made of


6

REFERENCES CITED

Bailey, Ralph

2000 Intensive Archaeological Survey of Selected Portions of the Charleston Naval

Weapons Station. Brockington and Associates. Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.

Brooks, Mark J., and James D. Scurry

1978 An Interstate Archaeological Survey of Amoco Realty Property in Berkeley

County, South Carolina with a Test of Two Subsistence-Settlement Hypotheses for the

Prehistoric Period. Research Manuscript Series Number 147. South Carolina Institute

of Archaeology and Anthropology, Columbia.

Cable, John

1996 A Study of Archaeological Predictive Modeling in the Charleston Harbor

Watershed, South Carolina. Report prepared for the Office of Ocean and Coastal

Resource Management, Charleston, by New South Associates, Irmo, South Carolina.

Mills, Robert

1825 Charleston District, South Carolina surveyed by Charles Vignoles & Henry

Ravenel, 1820. Atlas of the State of South Carolina, Made Under the Authority of the

Legislature; Prefaced with a Geographical, Statistical and Historical Map of the

State. F. Lucas, Jr., Baltimore.

O’Donoughue, Jason

2008a Living in the Low Country: Modeling Archaeological Site Location in the

Francis Marion National Forest, South Carolina. Unpublished Masters Thesis,

Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Poplin, Eric

1993 Archaeological Literature Review and Intensive Architectural Survey, North Rhett

Avenue Improvement Corridor, North Charleston, South Carolina. Brockington and

Associates. Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.

Scurry, James D.

2003 Integrating Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Modeling: Validating

Prehistoric Site-Settlement Models for the South Carolina Coastal Plain Using A

GIS. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of South

Carolina, Columbia.

SCALE:SOURCE:SOURCE DATE:DATE:

FIGURE #

1TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF

THE PROJECT AREAHANAHAN SCHOOL SITES #1 AND #2

BERKELEY COUNTY, SCWWW.SMEINC.COM

SEE SCALE BARUSGS: Ladson Quad

1979NOVEMBER 2014

/*ALL BOUNDARIES DEPICTED ON THIS SKETCH ARE APPROXIMATE AND INTENDED FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY.

0 150 300 450 60075Meters

S&ME JOB NO. 1413-14-160

DUPLIN

DUPLIN

WAHEE

CAROLINE

BETHERA

WAHEE

CAROLINE

BETHERADUPLIN

DUPLIN

DUPLIN

CAROLINE

WAHEE


FIGURE #

2AERIAL VIEW AND SOILS MAP

HANAHAN SCHOOL SITES #1 AND #2BERKELEY COUNTY, SC WWW.SMEINC.COM

SEE SCALE BARESRI, USDA

2014NOVEMBER 2014


0 110 220 330 44055Meters

S&ME JOB NO. 1413-14-160


9

Figure 3. View of field conditions in the western portion of the Project Area, facing north.

Figure 4. View of field conditions in the north central portion of the Project Area, facing north. This

photograph includes track, and furrows from past silvicultural activity.


10

Figure 5. One of the dirt paths, marked on the topographic map as a tertiary roadway. This image is

typical of the roadways during the time of the field investigation with approximately 30 percent of

the ground surface visible in these areas.


11

Figure 6. Results of the ArchSite review, conducted as part of the background information.


12

Figure 7. A portion of Mills’ Atlas (1825). The approximate location of the Project Area is

highlighted in red.

Figure 8. A portion of the 1916 Berkeley County Soils map, the approximate location of the Project

Area is highlighted in red.


FIGURE #

9SITE PROBABILITY MODEL

HANAHAN SCHOOL SITES #1 AND #2BERKELEY COUNTY, SC WWW.SMEINC.COM


2014NOVEMBER 2014


0 120 240 360 48060Meters

S&ME JOB NO. 1413-14-160

LegendHIGH PROBABILITY AREAS PROJECT AREA

!!

! !!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!>


FIGURE #

10RESULTS OF THE

FIELD INVESTIGATIONHANAHAN SCHOOL SITES #1 AND #2

BERKELEY COUNTY, SCWWW.SMEINC.COM


2014NOVEMBER 2014


0 80 160 240 32040Meters

S&ME JOB NO. 1413-14-160

Legend!> POSITIVE SHOVEL TEST PITS! NEGATIVE SHOVEL TEST PITS

PROJECT AREA

Isolated Find

Deer Stand and Game Feeding Area

Utility Corridor


15

Figure 11. Isolated Artifact.


16

Figure 12. Drawing of a typical soil profile.

reference: historic and archaeological properties survey · 11/13/2014 · 2003 integrating...

Documents