Cultural Resource Report - cob.org

-EXA.I

Cultural Resource Report

DRAYTON ARCHAEOLOGY

Cultural Resources Review for the Waldron Woods Residential Development,Bellingham, Whatcom County, Washington

By:Gaith L. Baldwin, M.A., RPAKeith Solmo, B.A.

Prepared For:Michael C. KingsleyWindeimere Commercial515 W. Bakerview Road

Bellingham, WA 98225

Drayton Technical Report: 0415B

April 27, 2015

Box 5424 - Bellingham WA 98227-5424 - www.draytonarchaeology.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Surmnary

Project Description and APERegulatory ContextGeologic ContextVegetationCultural/Historic BackgroundPrevious Archaeology

Historic Propeities ExpectationsMethods and ResultsConclusions

References Cited

APPENDIX A: Shovel Probe Results

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. A portion of the North Bellingham, Washington (1994) 7.5 Minute USGS mapillustrating the pro)ect location (not to scale) 3

Figure 2. An aerial u'nage of the APE (source: Google Earth) 4Figure 3. A site plan illustrating proposed development on the subject parcels............................. 5Figure 4. A poition of the 1860 GLO illustrating the approximate project location. Adapted

image provided by DAHP, April 2015 11Figure 5. Shovel Probe (SP) map illustrating probes placed in the northern portion of the subject

parcels .15Figure 6. Shovel Probe (SP) map illustrating probes placed in the southern portion of the subject

parcels . .16TABLE OF PHOTOS

Photo 1. A representative overview of the project area, shot from CP3. West aspect.Photo 2. KS17 soil profile

Drayton Arcliaeology Report 041 5A

Introduction

Author: Gaith Baldwin, Keith Solmo

Date: April 27, 2015Location: Bellingham, Whatcom County, WashingtonUSGS Quad: Bellingham North, WA 7.5 minute quad (1954, photorevised 1994)TRS: Section 1, Township 38 North, Range 2 East, Willamette Meridian

Summary

At your reqriest Drayton Archaeology (DA) conducted an archaeological review of your above-referenced project and U.S. Ariny Corps of Engineers (the Coips) permit. The site is a highly

disturbed approximate 23 acre parcel of former pastureland within a highly developedcorrunercial-residential development area of Bellingham, Whatcom County, Washington. Asmall area of wetland was delineated at the site thereby involving the Corps. The regulatoryprompt for the present work is the expected impact to the wetland by the proposed development.To address Corps mandates for securing the necessary peri'nit, the following letter report isoffered as partially satis:tying the Corps requirements of the National Historic Preservation Actof 1966 (NHPA), as amended (section 106). As the lead agency having jurisdiction over theundertaking, the Corps is required under 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800 of theNHPA to consider any potential effects to historic properties that the rindertaking may cause.Additional requirements of the Coips under section 106 are their sole preview (e.g. consultationwith all concerned parties).

The assessment consisted of background review, field investigation and production of this report.Background review included review of nearby cultural resources and historic propertiesregistered with the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation(DAHP), historic maps, and geomorphologic context. Based on fieldwork and observations tliepotential for impacting intact cultural resources is deemed low. No cultural materials or historicpropeities were observed within tlie Area of Potential Effects (APE) or the view shed thereof

during this review. DA recon'u'nends the Corps assert a determination of No Historic PropertiesAffected to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and any other consulting or affectedpaities for the subject undertaking.

Project Description and APE

The propeity can be located on the Bellingliam Noith, Washington (1954, revised 1994) 7.5Minute USGS map in Section 1, Township 38 Noith, Range 2 East, Willamette Meridian(Figures 1-2). Tlie proposed project would construct a churcli campris with associatedmultifamily residential apaitments with all suppoiting utilities, ingress and egress (Figure 3).

Drayton Arcliaeology Repoit 041 5A I

The area of potential effects (APE) consists of approximately 23 acres of undeveloped,previously cleared land. It is located within the paitially developed Cordata neighborhood ofNortli Bellingham, west of Guide Meridian and on the north and soritli side of Tremont Avenue.Tlie project proposes to create a mixed residential and cormnercial development coveringapproximately 23 acres. Development will include a church and a daycare facility with sixapartment buildings. For descriptive prirposes the development site has been split into threesections, Area 1, 2, and 3. Tlie Church of the Nazarene and associated parking lot will beconstructed on Area 1, with the church building in the center and the parking area to the west,avoiding development in the wetland area to the east. Forir apartment buildings and associatedparking areas will be constructed on the western side of Area 2, along with two maintenance orstorage buildings and parking areas on the nortl'ieastern portion of Area 2, avoiding wetlands inthe eastern central portion. Area 3 will be the site of two apartment buildings and parking areason the western poition, avoiding wetlands to the east.

Area I is located west of (mide Meridian and north of Tremont Avenue. It is an undevelopedparcel of slightly rolling wooded land, higher in the west and lower in the east. Vegetationconsists of new growth alder, cottonwood, few cedars, rushes and cottontails to the east, and anunderstory of Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry, elderberry, nettle, and snowberry. The easteinportion of Area 1 was saturated at the time of survey, and the western portion contained largesections of standing water. It is flanked to the east by the Guide Meridian, to the south byTremont Avenue, to the west by undeveloped Area 2, and to the north by an undevelopedwooded parcel.

Area 2 is an 11.5 acre parcel located approximately % mile west of the Guide Meridian, north ofTremont Avenue. It is an undeveloped, wooded lot of gradually sloping land, higher in thenorthwest and sloping downward to tlie southeast. Vegetation is identical to Area 1 . The westernportion of Area 2 contains large piles of mechanically altered sediment, likely from adjacentresidential development. Areas of standing water were present at the time of fieldwork. It isflanked to the west by newly constructed single family residences; to the soutl'i by TremontAvenue, to the nortli by an open hay field, and to the east by an rindeveloped wooded parcel andAreal.

Area 3 is a 9.19 acre parcel located approximately % mile west of the (mide Meridian sorith ofTremont Avenue. It is an undeveloped, wooded lot that is slightly liigher to the west and slopeseast and soutli. At tlie ti'ine of fieldwork, Area 3 was covered with large areas of standing wateras well. Vegetation is identical to Areas 1 and 2. It is flanked to the south by a trucking facility;to the east by a single residence (on tl"ie southeastern corner of tlie property) and undevelopedwooded land, to the north by Tremont Avenue and to tlie west by newly constructed singlefamily residences.

Drayton Arcliaeology Repoit 041 5A 2

122031,000'W 122"30,ODO'W 122o29.000'W _ . 122"28,000'W W_GS841llel7.90€!IW__1

:):):)

:)

t

<"":Qa-A q

7.1,,-=-,%-%, .xia:,. .

,__ '<t, =J -'%*:r!-a r.zS ==,. .. ,

.H.-)0=i): t'ay

__)jll' a /-".I "l,r' 7a',X25 i- __ ___,_. Xal' ,;), ,+ s..misl;,.2 '; '%_ :/.'l,I '-,"% - a%-%'7" I% ,, 7ao . '!-'aa-,,I

;= , ,%%%.;Mllr J'- j '144',.:'21

;- , aaa +.1 -' -a -

OIT

I:-. /;x

a

S .-#/

/ M@@-APE"-'- '

8 @&

*

-a- '!, ' oaaa ' "4- 44 ,f'! aiiy!a

1111%

,L.' 1I "'

% '/1

*W;ij*

I.

,,- -4.,l@i@

-'-i I

k=

aaa

a6

;,,,,'I %

*o-'35i i'-aim

L

i -" 't3<.:, y 7-t ,: =-r:": ,)/ s /-/ i(;f H , :J .--/"ai 5 ) 3i- - ! *J

:l , __llil<,: ,'.-,,;'-uqn: , ./1,) ]',,.' l,- -, ;:,,, }iaa) --,, .r ;l) (-ae- '-' ,aa36 a* afIJa-S "-r" +- : ./i-/ i ,-.. -r.;'/ l.,. i il:.i %.%,0,..x('

-, i'%'r-'JJ":""'-F- / -t,. a,i---a.--- i"*'l

rlVj" ,'..-- ) ,I.i 31-';; . t -32*l_/% .' !' ",, / . i lr ,,I" @:,a.. i (-_s_ _''-a; <' i, I " : . t

1, I.IIJ , ., I4 &* ), .m (g l & ll %' i', f+ F), a: ga I a0 I, %.. -, -a

=l-.Iy:__-t..i-t-. _ . -. -.,.o ;7""-w---.-"--a_"--- % -i: /{r/ " ai ' %.7JI t /ll,'l - ( -. ( fl/, , 'r;l-!-L)'I7o. :.aqX,(:l:.a,.a -:a:. . a ao' "'-s* a;a _a ["'_ s!"'"-_-+-;!

" 'v ,&" : , l_,4 -- Iii f -a--'.

_, (_ . a.t*'} ,(,i -_, :1

- S v-2t--- -l

a (j-"-:

;,.: !

! ffi - - -

[P,Ju, -.;

aa a " aa"" aa;' X_;"I *",_,,a'aaa"1':":"aai,7*.-/-',' :- "=",S-<?'

4

2

c

c

a41

a

it

i

- ')'- "'a' I ",i ,/a,-/'.. ., - ,,?-i-'( -:t> '0=:-,t'j'=-"l_,,

1 " 4m_"ao, Z"12 'F ' :12"-"' H>-"a-_ -t m. h ' ,-s "-(Q-.=,) ' -S =-=.. ,.:- f' inr.r- _ ,.

j ___J{< _J,:*> E ii -! ij-:.=,-.j'5r5 . -;;. -:-:' )'a:(6' -' ) (> __ , :, _,a'l;,.- .//"1 'iS i-- il "aa' a aa a" aa'C:a'a v'.' ".4 @BB

0 "i?l . s 00 01)0=--0 _ .!ili 0 a%. %_.a'- 0 . aa>.,

), -,:)S=-.€4),,-,-$i"'-f'l ,i

..,,, -;I _-/*a:* a aa 'v'( ' _)I '*m i

titti+"-!-=u-, " - --i;izoai.oooa w izzoao.ooo' w s>z

'!- ..-. .j'""" o- =-- -

Pnnled fiom TOKII t)001 Nil

'faW' §,a- (, 1,l%%"';_,g.. ._'::"(s';,T..%'--_-. ,X'.'l'5'a "' - ' :S - _, _, _a ' .>. o s ,..a.i) ,., -'=;a m H: ,,,__ ':;. .,., = ;l a -J--' . . ;!-y-- -7 l; ; _ . - - -.y.,iiii--'i-)"l'<.,,-.r-'.i-a'-a =-=

i'illy -,i_ 'i!iit! ' ;'. @ sll _ -, .!, l,s} , , = --** %., % .%.'.X

-=-:-=='-=-=;"'G

J"f":r.WJi-;'=;"='4?aa*+aabW'- " "": ffi -1(I I.

$1 -A..:.. t->y'<-1Figure 1. A portion of the North Bellingham, Washington (1994) 7.5 Minute USGS map illustratingthe project location (not to scale).


ii.x

Mi :Nsm

ll 1.!PFigure 2. An aerial image of the APE (source: Google Earth).

Drayton Arcl'iaeology Repoit 041 5A 4

'VS; T50 1todgH A'oloamla.ty uoip.s(I

pan

pro

posed

..i[j

n

i

a

!!

lirjl

i>

(pit

I

}

t

!

k 1mm d emwi lai

WAIJ)RON WOODSRECREAnON CENTER AND

DAYCARE SfTE PIANThF')l,-l

imI !

8

7

Regulatory Context

This present cultural resources review project was conducted, in part, to satisfy regulatoryrequirements for Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and the implementing regulations in 36CFR Pait 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies take into account the effects of theirundertakings on historic properties. A historic property is typically aged 50 years or older and isdefined in 36 CFR part 800.1 6(l)(1 ), as follows:

... any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object includedin, or eligible for inclusion in, the NRHP maintained by the Secretary of theInterior. This teri'n includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and

located within such properties. The teri'n inchides propeities of traditionalreligious and cultural impoitance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiianorganization and that meet the National Register criteria.

The procedures under Section 106 generally require the Federal agency involved in theundertaking to identi'[y the APE, inventory any historic propeities that may be located within theAPE, and deterrnine if the identified historic properties located within the APE may be eligible tobe listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP. An APE is defined in 36 CFR 800.16(d), asfollows:

,,, the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly orindirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic propeities, if anysuch propeities exist. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale andnature of an undeitaking and may be different for different kinds of effects causedby the undertaking

If NR]E-IP-eligible historic propeities are identified within the APE then potential adverse effectsto the historic properties rnust be assessed and a resolution of adverse effects recommended.Under Section 106, the responsible Federal agency nmst, at minimrun, consult with and seekcomment from the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and/or the Tribal HistoricPreservation Officer (THPO), as applicable, and consult witli any affected or potentially affectedNative American Tribe(s).

Geologic Context

The project area is located within western Whatcom Corinty at the noithern end of the PugetLowland. Tlie Puget Lowland is a geological and physiographic province that was sliaped by atleast four periods of extensive glaciation during the Pleistocene (Easterbrook 2003; Lasmanis1991). Tlie bedrock was depressed and deeply scoured by glaciers. Sediments were deposited


and often reworked as the glaciers advanced and retreated. A thick mantle of glacial drift andoutwash deposits were le-[t across much of Whatcom County at the end of the Fraser Glaciation;tlie last of these glacial periods (Easterbrook 2003).

The Vasl'ion Stade of the Fraser Glaciation began around 18,000 B.P. with an advance of theCordilleran ice sheet into the lowlands (Porter and Swanson 1998). The Puget Lobe of the ice

sheet flowed down into the Puget Lowland and reached its termirrus just south of Olympiabetween 14,500 and 14,000 BP (Clague and James 2002; Easterbrook 2003; Waitt and Thorson1983). The Puget Lobe was thicker towards the north and thinned towards its terminus. Thedepth of the ice near Bellingham is estimated to have been about 1900 meters (Easterbrook2003).

The Puget Lobe began to retreat shortly after reaching its terminus. Marine waters entered the

lowlands that had been carved orit by the glacier and filled Puget Sound. The remaining icefloated and rapidly wasted away. Everson glaciomarine drift deposits dating between 12,500 and11,500 BP were released from the melting glacial ice and deposited on the sea floor across thenorthern and central Puget Lowland (Easterbrook 2003). The enon'nous weiglit of the ice had

depressed the land but as the crust rebounded relative sea levels fell and exposed some of thedrift deposits (Clague and James 2002; Easterbrook 2003). The Cordilleran ice sheet advanced

once again during the Sumas Stade of the Fraser Glaciation from 11,600 to 10,000 BP, leavingglacial till and outwash deposits in nortliwestern Washington (Kovanen and Easterbrook 2002,Easterbrook 2003).

The surficial geology within the project areas consist of glacion'iarine drift deposits dating to the

Everson Interstade (Lapen 2000). Soils in the area are geologically mapped as Bellingham Drift,which refers to the deposition of sediments by fluvial, post-glacial flooding tliat has shaped thesouthern poition of the larger Frasier River Delta (Lapen 2000).

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) describes soils within the project area as

Whatcom - Labounty silt loams, O to 8 percent slopes. Specifically, the soils in this map unit arecomposed of 55% Whatcom Series, 25% Laborinty Series, 7% Labounty art. drained, 6%Bellingham, 4% Shalcar, and 3% Skipopa soils (UC Davis 2015). Major soil components aredescribed below:

Whatcom Series soils are of tlie Order Spodosols, Suborder Orthods. They are described as"deep, moderately well drained soils formed in loess and volcanic ash over glaciomarine dri'ft

(UC Davis 2015)." Slopes range from 0 to 60 percent. Wliatcom Series soils are the uplandcomponent of the Kettle-Kame topography typical of glaciomarine flood plains, with LabountySeries soils filling in the lowland poitions. A typical pedon consists of an Ap horizon of darkbrown silt loam from 0 to 9 inclies (O to 23 cm); a Bsl horizon of dark brown silt loarn from 9 to


13 inches (23 to 33 cm); a Bs2 horizon of dark brown silt loam from 13 to 16 inches (33 to 41cm); a 2Btl horizon of light olive brown loam from 16 to 20 inches (41 to 51 cm); a 2Bt2horizon of mottled light olive brown loam from 20 to 26 inches (51 to 66 cm); a 2C1 horizon ofliglit olive gray loam from 26 to 35 inches (66 to 89 cm); and a 2C2 horizon of dark gray loamfrom 35 to 60 inches (89 to 152 cm).

Labounty Series soils are of the Order Alfisols, Suborder Aqualfs. They are described as "deep,poorly drained soils formed in glaciomarine drift witli an admixture of loess and volcanic ash

(NRCS 2015)." Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. Labounty Series soils are the lowlandcomponent of the Kettle-Kame topography typical of glaciomarine flood plains, with WhatcomSeries soils comprising the upland poitions. A typical pedon consists of an Ap horizon of verydark grayish brown silt loam from O to 10 inches (O to 25 cm); mi El g horizon of grayish brownloam from 10 to 13 inches (25 to 33 cm); an E2g horizon of light brownish gray loarn from 13 to16 inches (33 to 41 cm); an E3g horizon of light olive gray loam from 16 to 22 inches (41 to 56cm); a Btgl liorizon of grayish brown and olive gray loam from 22 to 28 inches (56 to 71 cm); aBtg2 horizon of olive gray and light olive gray loam from 28 to 35 inches (71 to 89 cm); and aCg horizon of gray loam from 35 to 60 inclies (89 to 152 cm) (Goldin 1992:1 71-172; UC Davis2015).

Vegetation

Onsite vegetation prior to historic clearing for farinland would have consisted of mainlyevergreen forest with Doriglas fir (Pseudotsuga mertziesii) as the main overstory species.Western redcedar (Thuja plicata), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), and western hemlock (Tsugaheterophylla) worild have been present to a lesser extent. Common ruiderstory plants would haveincluded various ferns, salal (Gaultheria shallon), vine maple (Acer circinaturn), salmonberry(Rubus spectabilis), Indian pkun (Oemleria cerasiformis'), stinging nettles (Urtica dioica),trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and various sedges (Franklin and Dyrness 1973:44-5; Pojarand Mackinnon 1994).

At the time of survey, dominant vegetation on-site consisted of new growtli alder, aspen,cottonwood, minimal new growth cedars, Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry, nettle, plumberry,elderberry, vine maple, and snowberry.

Cultural/Historic Background

In any investigation of the history of an area a discussion of the past inhabitants is necessary toappreciate tlie fiill spectrum of possible occupational reinnants. It is also impoitant to broadlydiscuss the land rise relationship of the setting specifically and the general occupation of the areaalong the Noithwest coast and Bellingham Bay. Previous studies provide a more comprel'iensive


background applicable to the surrorinding project area (Ruby and Brown 1986; Stern 1934;Suttles 1951; 1990; Tremaine 1975).

The project area is located within land traditionally associated with Central Coast Salish, anorthern-straits people. Within this broad categorization, the project is located on the boundaryof the Lurnmi ai'id the Nooksack groups. The Lummi are a Straits Salish people while tlieNooksack are an inland-adapted group. According to Ruby and Brown (1986:111), the Luinmilanguage is the same Straits, or Lkrmgen, dialect as tlie Vancouver Island Songish. According toLurnmi language teacher Smack e ah, Matthew Warbus, the Luimni language is correctlyreferred to as a'Xwlemi Chosen."

Native Americans occupied the region for at least 10,000 years prior to arrival of Europeans inthe late 1 8"1 century. At contact the Luimni primarily occupied coastal areas while the Nooksackpeople lived inland; however, traditional use areas of both groups would have had areas ofoverlap. Indigenous people had established micleated settlements at the northwestern extremitiesof San Juan and Lopez Islands, the east and west sounds of Orcas Island, and on the mainlandnear the southwestern portion of the Nooksack River lowlands (Suttles 1990, Tremaine 1975 :10).Lummi territory included the shorelines of present-day Whatcom County from Point Whitehornor Cherry Point to Chuckanut Bay and inland as far as Lake Terrell in the northeast, to the outletof Lake Whatcom in the southeast and up the Nooksack River to near the present town ofFerndale (Suttles 1951). Suttles (1951) and Stern (1934) both place the area around lowerSqualicum Creek within Lummi territory and Suttles reports a Lurnmi village at the mouth of thecreek named x"V'a 'l 'ax"'am (dog salmon place). The present-day Lummi Reservation includessome of their forrner mainland villages (Stern 1934).

Tlie first recorded European to visit the Bellingham Bay area was Francisco Eliza who visitedbriefly in 1791. Josepli Whidbey, serving under George Vancouver, surveyed the bay verysliortly after that and it was named in honor of Sir William Bellingham. The first settler onBellingham Bay, William Prattle, anived in 1852 and other settlers soon followed. Fourcommunities sprung rip: Whatcom, Sehome, Bellingham, and Fairhaven. Tliese eventuallymerged into modern day Bellingham (Jeffcott 1949).

From a liistorical standpoint, European settlement was initially restricted to the coastal areasaround Bellingham Bay. Dense stands of old growtli timber slowed inland expansion inWhatcom Corinty until the early 1 840's. As logging technology became more sophisticated andthe number of immigrants to the area grew, land was cleared fuither inland from the coastline.

The Euro American utilization of the Bellingliam Bay began in earnest around 1856 whensettlers arrived and quickly realized the potential use'[ulness of Bellingham Bay as a staging areafor travelers heading north to mine gold in the Fraser River Valley (Jeffcott 1949). BellinghamBay soon experienced rapid growth associated with mining, logging, railroads and maritime


commerce. Previous studies provide a comprehensive background applicable to the project area(Ruby and Brown 1986; Stein 1934; Suttles 1951; 1990; Tremaine 1975; Laittrell 2004a and2004b).

No land development had occurred in the APE or even the near vicinity prior to the time of thefirst land survey by the U.S. General Land Office (GLO), ca. 1859. Luttrell (2004a: 4) notes thatGuide Meridian Road was created in 1886 and later upgraded in the 1 890s when it was plankedto 16 'ft wide. The local area remained largely undeveloped until the 1950s. It was at this timethat Guide Meridian Road was incorporated into the state higliway system (SR 539). It continues

to serve as a higlily utilized route between the International Border and Bellingham. Figure 4illustrates the project area on an 1860 General Land Ordinance (GLO) map, locating it within oradjacent to a broad lowland swamp.

Drayton Arcliaeology Repoit 041 5A

Pl.r'o

Iv@,),!5__. .

I rezaI ' "'I-S "I I "_1 t

i =-)'= iaJ'yiI jee l! 7J7fc _'ltd..]'w

Jki<

-IMIOt

10II

%

l,,l- -J/ ,

l-">ijl

.k.l

!"'-"- "-"'-,;

I

t

I Ii :

17 Je€

I

(-*@ (I -=-=-I - "

-/ l#-: h.r iurtl tizz*t

& - --, -

L.- -__ro I co &4(vel 6z, ..i I w 1. T a (---I J ppproyimate ! , ;, proje4Area i i,':7' /i bi I s,,=,rl-'.'a.E-l =.- ,-l'io: ";" -..='.. . !,< R!:..i -;, ),4 j- -=f;

ku JI-6I aWIS m I "o"'4-i' l I. ..l '="_ll I I ri Il l_ !_ '= ,;<S . l,_ 7 '

jl =:l,,l ,l

rzaPA-t !f Q ,"--'l

;

!4,., I.. 77'1a _ ;l-iszgl; lxl 4@t l'y zoal

7

Zi

%Ar-Q, . ,j

7R

s(11

(.S yboyzl'

%'y'l

,r-_iI

l' h%iI nffl:7_ ;,J

,,# T %J

$'b' ,

r + "h

/daSk,

'J - -

#- ,, 1. }.

'% 4:l

,_ "I ffP.. ,:7

!

<

,. l.!I

I

("32'S/:

) ),x(/J

l,, -- -/ jF ,l i 1- -

J[i _t&.-.""aa,,4 ffi_l_?__(,I

,(1

" - "'aa"' --'1. :iJh -_,

Yu:t

d'+jb

& - ..&_

:===-i' -lk% & _: ,',

ab <j- _y- "s'K

lu:4*:'1

2 "-'&

$ei

K d'%'.tu,'Jlf 6-< !Y

fr.f,')L;iyl

/i 1/e Ij. I,1 I 'Z-(,si,11 } z, .j' ),' .,,='Xr

7l1

t:l,&z,- ] [45

f.j

/)

<

,l =fHa / ,.i'i)k)Mj

X,} .ib. 7,,4 J

Dra

yt011

Ardtae01ogyRe

p01

to45A

map illustrating the appmximate project location. NAosisuitpbnewmlngionxiiiiilnriiiiil

0 ISCUII llAtR: Thli flllp il k mmni* pus en)y. All 6tlanees im loaNont avappmlmaje

Figure 4. A portion of the 1860 GLO illustrating the approximate project location. Adapted image provided by DAHP, April 2015.

Previous Archaeology

As early as the late 1800's and into the 1900's archaeologists investigated the noitliwest coastarea. Studies particular to this area were conducted by Charles Hill-Tout in the 1 890s. FollowingHill-Tout in the early 20th century was Harlan I. Smith (1901, 1903, and 1907). Regionally,Borden (1950, 1968, and 1970) demonstrates that Native groups have occupied the Fraser Valleyfor at least tlie last 10,000 years. There has been little corroborating evidence to support thiswork as most investigations have focused on the coast and islands of the Pacific Northwest rathertlian upon the interior. The hypothesis of Dr. Garland Grabert (1983) and his students(Montgomery 1 979; Spear 1977; Larsen 1971) suggest that there are rnuch older sites associatedwith a paleoshoreline and raised water levels in the region and investigations in the interior maygive a better understanding of land use during the earliest periods of Northwest Coast settlement.

Recently numeroris small-scale archaeological investigations have been conducted throughoutthe immediate area. Much of this work is recorded in project-specific reports filed with privateclients and the DAHP. At some point in the :[uture, the data accurnulated from these small-scalestudies will provide valuable insight into archaeological site distribution and patterns ofprehistoric landscape use. One previously recorded archaeological site is recorded within onemile of the project area.

In 2004, Luttrell conducted a cultural resources investigation for the Washington StateDepaitment of Transpoitation (WSDOT) on SR 539 (Meridian Street) from Horton Road(rorighly !/l mile south of Tremont Avenue) to Ten Mile Road (Luttrell 2004a). Survey andshovel testing witliin the project APE did not identify any cultural resources, although eightpreviorisly ru'irecorded historic propeities were inventoried. Due to a lack of land access, Luttrellconducted a follow-up survey at a parcel sorith of the project area wliich also failed to identifyany cultural resources (Luttrell 2004b).

Drayton Archaeology has conducted numerous projects adjacent to, and in the near vicinity of,tlie present APE in analogous, if not exactly the same cultural and environrnental contexts(Baldwin and Juell 2009; Baldwin and Kaiser 2009; Baldwin 2010; Koziarski and Baldwin2010). Baldwin and Kaiser (2009) conducted a cultural review and field investigation in advanceof a proposed new school construction project for the City Of Bellingham. There were nocultural resources identified on that 20-acre parcel.

Koziarski and Baldwin (2010) reviewed two geographically separate parcels for a wetland permitand an off-site mitigatton area for another Cordata development project. No cultural materialswere located during the Koziarski and Baldwin (2010) review; however, a historic homestead(45WH868) was recorded at tlie off-site mitigation site on Noithwest Road. The site consisted ofl'iorisehold trash deposits and partial structural foundation remains.


DA also conducted an assessment at 375 Sequoia Drive, another Cordata development site,southwest of the present parcel (Baldwin and Juell 2009). There were no cultural materialslocated at that parcel. In addition, Baldwin (2010) surveyed a large area in the SW % of Section1, witliin the Cordata area, for the City of Bellingham where there were no resources recorded.And more recently, Baldwin (2013) conducted a survey of a 75-acre parcel at the northermnostportion of the Cordata area, excavating 86 shovel probes; and again, no cultural materials werelocated. Each of these surveys utilized exliaustive sampling of the subsoil by means of shoveltesting and pedestrian survey. No parcel in the Cordata area has yet yielded cultural resources.

Historic Properties Expectations

Based on review of the project scope, and enviromnental and cultural contexts, the APE isconsidered to be located in an area of low probability for historic properties.

* The APE is situated in an inland, formerly forested enviromnent within an area of historicmarsh/swamp wetlands. Due to the limitation of resources available and inhospitality oftlie environment for camping or settling, the area was not suited for long terrnoccupations. Restrictions of the natural environment would have inhibited all buttemporary or transitory precontact resource collection activities. As such, significantarcliaeological deposits or accumulations would be unlikely.

* No ethi'iographic or archaeological sites have been previously recorded in or in the nearvicinity of the APE.

* Historic maps indicate the liistory of land use in the APE is limited to that evident today,hay farming and/or livestock pasturing.

* If cultural resources were to be present in the APE, they corild be expected to be locatednear the present ground surface, as review of the enviromnental context indicates littlesoil development has occurred in the local area since the last glaciation.

* Types of cultural resources tliat may be encorintered in the APE could include trails orsimilar features representing a range of hunting, fisliing, plant gathering, and/orceremonial activities or historic trasl'i scatters or aitifacts associated with loggingactivities, residential occupation, and/or transpoitation.

Methods and Results

The pliysical archaeological assessment of an area is conducted through visual reconnaissance ofa project area, examination of existing grorind disturbances and subsurface excavation as needed.Surface survey of an area proposed for ground alteration or otlier impact is employed in an


attempt to locate any surficial cultural materials or structures with any historic or archaeologicalimportance or cultural concern. When utilized, shovel probes or mechanical excavation can assistin providing a wider sample of subsurface soil conditions for determining the potential for, orpresence/absence of, buried archaeological deposits. The employment of probes or trenches ismost often dependent upon considerations of tlie landform, topography, project proposal andsubsurface geologic conditions.

When utilized, shovel probes (SP) consist of cylindrical pits measuring approximately 40 to 50centimeters in diameter and are excavated to a target deptli of one meter, or until sterile sribsoilor grorindwater is reached. All sediment is screened through % incli hardware mesh.Stratagraphic profiles are measured and described, noting sediment type, consistency, color, andcontents. Probes are photographed and plotted with a GPS unit. Notes detailing all SP results areprepared and presented in Appendix 1. Each shovel test location is backfilled upon completion.

The present field investigation was conducted on April 2'1d and 13"1 2015 by DA archaeologistKeith Solmo and field technicians Marsha Hanson and Courtney Paton. Weather conditions wereovercast and wet. Poitions of the parcels contained standing water and soil conditions across thesite were saturated or wet. Field investigation consisted of a combination of efforts, includingvisual reconnaissance, pedestrian survey, and subsurface testing. Visual reconnaissance consistedof observing topographical and other above-ground features that could provide indication as tothe absence and/or presence of potential historic properhes in the APE. Pedestrian surveyconsisted of walking the APE to investigate the potential for any buried and/or abovegrorindhistoric properties. Subsurface testing consisted of excavating selectively placed shovel probesalong north-south running transects at 30 meter intervals to confirrn soil types, degree of grounddisturbance, and to investigate the presence/absence of buried archaeological material and/ordeposits (Figures 5 and 6).

Drayton Archaeology Repoit 041 5A 14

KS15

KS16

i:MHl8 MHl6 KS13

MH19

I MH20

KSi7

KSI

KS18

KS'l1

MH12KS10

MH14

MH9

CP6 KS19

MH15 MH8KS20

KS21KS22

Figure 5. Shovel Probe (SP) map illustrating probes placed in the northern portion of the subject parcels.

MH9

MH15 MH8CP6 KS19

KS20

KS21KS22

KS1

MHI

MH2

MH3

MH4

MH5

ffi

CP1 KS2

CP2

KS3

CP3

KS4

CP4CP5

KS5 MH7

KS6

MH6

Figure 6. Shovel Probe (SP) map illustrating probes placed in the southern portion of the subject parcels.

Ground coverage across the APE is heavily vegetated (Photo 1). The understory consistsprimarily of Himalayan blackberry, salmonberry, as well as rushes and tall grasses in wetland

areas. Overstory consists of new growth alders, aspens, and cottonwoods with few cedars in Area1.

Photo 1. A representative overview of the project area, shot from CP3. West aspect.

A total of 49 shovel probes were excavated throughout tlie project area (Figures 5 and 6).

General 30 meter north-south transects were followed, and SP's were placed at 30 meterintervals, avoiding saturated soil and standing water. A description of the soil sequence and

composition observed in each sliovel probe is detailed in Appendix A. The dominant soil

encountered in the APE, tliougli disturbed (fill), was entirely representative of a glaciallyoriguiatuig soil deposit, as repoited by USDA NRCS and identified as Whatcom-Labounty silt

loam, O to 8 percent slopes (Photo 2) (UC Davis 2015).

Drayton Arcl'iaeology Report 041 5A 17

l$ '

l l 4 'l

!'4..i

4 %## Jl

1 ;k

Photo 2. KS17 soil profile.

No cultural materials, features, or historic properties were located as a result of this fieldinvestigation.

Conclusions

Drayton Archaeology's cultural resources assessment consisted of background review, fieldinvestigation, and production of this report. Background review determined the APE to belocated in an area of low probability for historic propeities. Field investigation included visual

reconnaissance, pedestrian survey, and subsurface testing. The project does not appear to have

the potential to effect historic propeities, and no fuitlier cultural resources oversight is warranted.Drayton Archaeology recomi'nends the US Arrny Corps of Engineers asseit a deterrnination of

"No Historic Propeities Affected" for this undeitaking to all consulting paities.

It should also be recognized that althougli this is a federalized project and section 106 is the

overruling legal review process, Wasliington State law provides for the protection of allarchaeological resources under RCW Cliapter 27.53, Arcliaeological Sites and Resources. The


RCW prohibits the unauthorized removal, theft, and/or destruction of archaeological resourcesand sites it also offers guidance for treatment of resources not specifically addressed in thesection 106 process. Tliis statute also provides for prosecution and financial penalties coveringconsultation and the recovery of archaeological resources. Additional legal oversight is providedfor Indian burials and grave offerings rinder RCW Chapter 27.44, Indian Graves and Records.RCW 27.44 states that the willful removal, mutilation, defacing, and/or destruction of Indianburials constitute a Class C felony. A recent addition to Washington legal code, RCW 68.50.645,Notification, provides a strict process for the notification of law enforcement and otlier interestedpaities in tl'ie event of tlie discovery of aH human remains regardless of perceived patrimony.Tlie assessment of the propeity has been conducted by a professional archaeologist and meets orexceeds the criteria set foith in RCW: 27.53 for professional archaeological reporting andassessment.

In the event that arcliaeological materials are encountered during the development of theproperty, an archaeologist should irru'nediately be notified and work halted in the vicinity of thefind until the materials can be inspected and assessed. In the event of inadvertently discoveredhuman remains or indeten'ninate bones, pursuant to RCW 68.50.645 all work must stopimmediately and law enforcement should be contacted. Any remains should be covered andsecured against further disturbance, and an archaeologist should be called to facilitatecoimnunication with the Bellingham Police Department, State Physical Anthropologist at DAHPand (recormnended) the Lumrni Nation and Nooksack Tribe of Indians.

Drayton Archaeology Report 041 5A 19

References Cited

Baldwin, Garth Li.,

2010 Archaeological Assessment for the City of Bellingham Cordata Park Trail, PhaseI, and Horton Road Extension, Bellingham, atcom County, WA. Technical Report:011 0C prepared for Gina G. Austin. On file at DAHP, Olympia, WA.

2013 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Cordata E8-E9 project in Bellingham,Whatcom County, Washington. Tierra ROW Archaeological Report No. 2013-052prepared for Larrabee Springs, Incorporated, Bellingham WA.

Baldwin, Garth Li., and Christopher L.S. Kaiser.2009 Archaeological Assessmem of the Aldrich School Construction and Mitigation

Sites, Bellingham, atcom County, WA. Drayton Archaeology Technical Report:0609D prepared for Bellingham School District #501.

Baldwin, Garth L. and Kenneth E. Juell

2009 Archaeological Assessment of the 375 Sequoia Drive Building Project,Bellingham, natcom County, WA. Drayton Archaeology Technical Report: 0109Bprepared for Sequoia Property. On file at DAHP, Olympia, WA.

Borden, Charles E.

1950 Preliminary Repoit on Archaeological Investigations in the Fraser River DeltaRegion. Anthropology in British Columbia, 4:26-32.

1968 Prehistory of the Lower Mainland. In Lower Fraser Valley.' Evolution of aCrdtural Landscape, edited by A.H. Siemens. British Geographical Series 9:9-26.

1970 Culture History of the Fraser Delta Region: Art Outline. B.C. Studies 6, 7:95-112.

Clague, John J. and Thomas S. James2002 History and Isostatic Effects of the Last Ice Sheet in Sorithern British Columbia.

Quaternary Science Reviews 21 :71-87.

Easterbrook, Don J.

2003 Cordilleran Ice Sheet Glaciation of tlie Puget Lowland and Columbia Plateau andAlpine Glaciation of the North Cascade Range, Washington. In Western Cordilleraand Adjacent Areas, ed. T. W. Swanson, pp. 137-157. Geological Society of America,Boulder, Colorado.


Franklin, J.F. and c.'r. Dyrness1973 Natural Vegetatiori of Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service General

Technical Repoit PNW-8, Poitland, Oregon.

Grabert, Garland F.

1983 Ferndale in Prehistory: Archaeological Investigations in the Lower and MiddleNooksack Valley. Occasional Paper #19, Center for Northwest Studies, WesternWashington University, Bellingham, Washington.

Goldin, Alan

1992 Soil Survey of atcom County Area, Washington. United States Department ofAgriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with Washington StateDepartment of Natural Resorirces and Washington State University, AgricultureResearch Center, Washington D.C.

Jeffcott, Percival R.

1949 Nooksack Tales and Trails. Whatcom County Pioneer Association, Ferndale,Washington.

Kovanen, Dori J., and Don J. Easterbrook2002 Timing and Extent of the Younger Dryas Age (ca.l2,500-10,000 14C yr B.P.)

Oscillations of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet in the Fraser Lowland, Western NorthAmerica. Quaternary Research 57:208-224.

Koziarski, Ralph and Garth L. Baldwin2010 Archaeological Assessment for the Cordata Urban Village Development and

Riley Wetlands Mitigation Area, Bellingham, Whatcom Covmty, WA. DraytonArchaeology Technical Report: 0610B, prepared for Blair Murray, Tin RockDevelopment. On file at DAHP, Olympia, WA.

Lapen, Thomas J.2000 Geologic Map of the Bellingham 1:100,000 Quadrangle, Washington.

Washington Division of Geology and Eaith Resources, Open File Report 2000-5.

Larsen, Curtis E.

1971 A7? Investigation into the Relationship of Change in Relative Sea Level to Socia7Change in the Prehistory of Birch Bay, Washington. Unpublished Master's Thesis onfile with Depaitment of Anthropology, Western Washington University, Bellingham,Washington.


Lasmanis, Raymond

1991 The Geology of Washington. Rocks and Minerals 66:262-277.

Luttrell, Charles T.

2004a Cultural Resources Investigations for Washington State Department ofTransportation's S'R 539: Horton Road Vicinity to Ten Mile Road Vicinity, WhatcomCounty, Washington. Archaeological and Historical Services Short Report DOTO4-24,Eastern Washington University, Cheney.

2004b SR 539: Horton Road Vicinity to Ten Mile Road Vicinity Project. AHS LetterRepoit DOTO4-34 (Addendum to AHS Short Report DOTO4-24). Archaeological and

Historical Services Short Report DOTO4-24, Eastern Washington University, Cheney.

Montgomery, Keith R.1979 Prehistoric Settlements of Sumas Valley, Washington. Unpublished Master's

thesis, Department of Anthropology, Western Washington University, Bellingham.

Pojar, Jim and Andy Mackinnon editors1994 Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast: Washington, Oregon, British Columbia

and Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing, Renton Washington.

Porter, S. C. and T. W. Swanson1998 Radiocarbon Age Constraints on Rates of Advance and Retreat of the Puget Lobe

of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet During the Last Glaciation. Quaternary Research 50:205-213.

Ruby, Robert H. and John A. Brown1986 A Guide to Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest. University of Oklahoma Press,

N o rm an.

Smith, Harlan I.

1901 Arcliaeological Investigations on the Noitli Pacific Coast in 1899. AmericanAnthropologist 3: 563-567.

1903 Sliell Heaps of the Lower Fraser, British Cohu'nbia. Ainerican Museum of NaturalHistory, Memoirs 3 (4). New York.

1907 Arcliaeology of the Gulf of Georgia and Puget Sorind. American Museum ofNatural History Memoir 4 (6). New York.


Spear, Robert1977 A Prehistoric Site Chtster in Western atcom County, Washingtort. Unpublished

Master's Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Western Washington University,Bellingham.

Stern, Bernhard J.

1934 The Lummi Indians of Northwest Washington. Cohimbia University Press, NewYork.

Suttles, Wayne P.1951 The Economic Life of the Coast Salish of Haro and Rosario Strait. Ph.D

Disseitation in Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle.

1990 Central Coast Salish. In Handbook of North American Indians vol. 7 NorthwestCoast, edited by Wayne P. Suttles pp.453-475. Series editor w.c. Stuitevant,Smithsonian Institute, Washington D. C.

Tremaine, David G.

1975 Indian and Pioneer Settlement of the Nooksack Lowland, Washington to 1890.Occasional Paper 4, Center for Pacific Noithwest Studies, Western Washington StateCollege, Bellingham Washington.

UC Davis SoilWeb Map2015 UC Davis California Soil Resource Lab's SoilWeb Interactive map, displaying

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soils data, available at:http://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/gmap/. Accessed April 2015.

Waitt, Richard B. Jr., and Robeit M. Thorson1983 The Cordilleran Ice Slieet in Washington, Idaho, and Montana. In The Late

Pleistocene, edited by Stephen Porter, pp. 53-70. Late-Quaternary Environments ofthe United States, Vol. 1, H.E. Wright, Jr., general editor, University of Miru'xesotaPress, Mirmeapolis.


APPENDIX A: Shovel Probe Results.

DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)

SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION CONTENTS

Shovel Probe CPOI

O-55 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subangulargravel content

No Cultural Material

Notes: Grormd water at 55cmbs

Shovel Probe CPO2

O-15 1 0YR 3/2 Very dark grayisli brown silt loam with minimalsubangular gravel content


15-55 1 0YR 4/2 Dark grayish brown silt loam No Cultural Material

55-67 2.5Y 5/3 Liglit Olive brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Notes: Groruid water at 65cmbs

Shovel Probe CPO3

O-24 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subangulargravel content


24-30 IOYR 2/1 Black silt loam witli decomposing organic matter No Criltural Material

30-74 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam No Criltural Material

74 - 83 2.5Y 5/3 Liglit olive brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe CPO4

O-65 1 0YR 3/2 Very dark grayisl'i brown silt loam witli minimalsubangular gravel content


65 - 69 2.5Y 5/3 Liglit olive brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe CPO5

O-18 1 0YR 3/2 Very dark grayisli brown silt loam witli minimalsubangular gravel content



DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)

SEDIMF,NT DESCRIPTION CONTENTS

Shovel Probe CPO6

0 - 42 I Fill material I No Cultural MaterialShovel Probe CPO7

O-53 I OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrorinded

gravel content


53 - 58 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown glacial till mNotes: Grorind water at 65cmbs.

Shovel Probe M]EfOl

0-20 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrounded gravel content and decomposuig orgamc matter,cliarcoal present


20 - 50 l OYR 3/4 Dark yellowisl'i brown fined grained silt loam witliminimal subrounded gravel content


50 - 56 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown liiglily compacted glacial sedimentswitli moderate subrounded gravel content


Notes: Grormd water at 56 cmbs.

Shovel Probe MHO2

O-10 lOYR3/3Darkbrownfinegrainedsiltloamwitluninimal Isubrounded gravel content and decomposing orgamc matter


10-33 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fined to medium grained siltloam witli moderate subrormded gravel content

No Criltural Material

33-44

I2w.l5tYll 14n/04dOerlaitveesbllrbolwOlnlnlidiegdlilUy aCvOelni pcaOclltteedlltglacial sedimentsffi

Drayton Arcliaeology Repoit 0415A 25

DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe MHO3

O-16 I OYR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrorinded gravel content and decomposutg orgamc matter


16-32 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown higlily compacted glacial sedimentswith moderate subrounded and subangular gravel and cobblecontent


16-23 Western profile only, 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown siltloam with cliarcoal fleckntg


Notes: Krotovina in NE section of profile 19 - 32 cmbs, 1 0YR 3/3 Strat I sediments.

Shovel Probe MHO4

O-14 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrormded gravel content and decomposing orgamc matter


14-43 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fined to medium grainedsand/silt loam witli moderate subrounded gravel content


43 - 56 5YR 4/4 Reddisli brown fine grained silt loam with minimalsubrounded gravel content


56 - 70 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fined to medium grainedsand/silt loam witli n'ioderate subrorinded gravel content

No Cultiiral Material

Notes: Ground water at 69 cmbs.

Shovel Probe M]H[05

O-18 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrounded gravel content


18-49 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fined to medium grainedsand/silt loam witli moderate subrounded gravel contentmottled witli Strat I and III


49 - 56 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments witli moderatesubrorinded gravel and cobble content


DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)

SEDIMENT DESCRIPTION

I

CONTENTS

Shovel Probe l%tHO6

O-15 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrormded

gravel content


15-42 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fined to medirun grainedsand/silt loam witli moderate subrounded gravel content


Notes: Root impasse at 42 cmbs.

Shovel Probe MHO7

0-3 1 0YR 3/2 Very dark brown silt loam witli minimalsubrortnded gravel content and liigb density of decomposingorganic matter


3-34 I OYR 3/3 Dark browi'i silt loam witli minimal subrorutded

gravel content


Notes: Root impasse at 34 cmbs.

Shovel Probe MHO8

O-33 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam with minimalsubrounded gravel content and decomposing organic matter


33 - 50 1 0YR 5/2 Grayisli brown fined grained clay loam witlicliarcoal present


50 - 59 5YR 4]4 Reddisli brown fine to medium grained sand/siltloam witl'i minimal subrounded gravel content


59-64 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments with moderatesribrounded gravel content


Shovel Probe MHO9

O-57 1 0YR 3/3 Dark Brown silt loam with minimal subrounded

gravel content and decomposing organic materialNo Cultural Material

57-60 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe MHIO

0-34 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel content


34-41I

2.5Y 4]4 0live brown glacial till


DEPTH

BELOWSURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe MHII

O-31 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel content


31-55 5 YR 4/4 Reddisli brown silt loam witli minimal subrormded

gravel contentNo Cultiiral Material

55-60 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial till No Cultiiral Material

Notes: Ground water at 58cmbs

Shovel Probe MH12

O-36 10YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrorinded

gravel content



Shovel Probe MH13

O-25 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subroruided

gravel content

No Qiltural Material

25-33 l OYR 4/3 Brown silt loam witli minimal subrormded gravelcontent


33-38 2.5Y Olive brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe MH14

0-33 IOYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrormded

gravel mottled with Strat III


33-45 1 0YR 4/3 Brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded gravelcontent



Shove} Probe M]E][15

O-19 IOYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel


19-50 10 YR 4/3 Brown silt loam witli cliarcoal and minimal

subrounded gravel


2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial till


DEPTH

BELOWSURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe MH16

0-20 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrormded

gravel content


20-38 1 0YR 3/4 Dark brown yellowisli brown silt loam witliminimal subrounded gravel


38-49 1 0YR 5/4 Yellowisli brown fine sandy silt loam witli minimalsubrounded gravel


49-52 2.5Y Olive brown glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe MH17

O-23 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel content


23-72 10 YR 3/4 Mottled dark yellowisli brown sandy silt loam witlicliarcoal and minimal subrounded gravel content



Shovel Probe MH18

0-20 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrounded

gravel content


20-27 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowish brown silt loam witli minimalsubrormded gravel


27-34 2.5Y 4]4 0live brown glacial till No Criltural Material

Shovel Probe MH19

O-17 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrounded

gravel content


17-40 10 YR 3/4 Dark yellowish brown sandy silt loam witli minimalsubrorinded gravel content


2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial till


DEPTH

BELOWSURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe M][-I20

O-15 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrorinded

gravel contentNo Cultural Material

15-46 l OYR 4/3 Brown fine sandy silt loam witli minimalsubrounded gravel content



Shovel Probe KSOI

O-26 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fine grained silt loam witlimoderate subrorutded gravel content


26 - 45 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments witli moderatesubrounded gravel content


Shovel Probe KSO2

O-17 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowish brown fine grained silt loam witlione rounded cobble


17-40 5YR 3/4 Dark reddish brown fined grained silt loam No Cultural Material

40-50 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments witli moderatesubrounded gravel content


Shovel Probe KSO3

O-13 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown 'fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrounded gravel content


13-41 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown fine grained silt loam witlimoderate subrounded gravel content mottled witli 5YR 3/4Dark reddisli brown fined gramed silt loam


41-55

I

2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments witli moderatesubrounded gravel content



DEPTH

BELOWSURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe KSO4

O-15 10 YR 3/2 Veiy dark brown fine grained silt loam witli liiglidensity of decomposing organics


15-57 I OYR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrorinded gravel content


Note: Root impasse at 57 cmbs.

Shovel Probe KSO5

O-12 l OYR 3/2 Very dark brown fine grained silt loam with liiglidensity of decomposing organics


12 - 50 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam witli minimalsubrorinded gravel content


50 - 57 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial sediments with moderatesubrorinded gravel content


Shovel Probe KSO6

O-18 1 0YR 3/2 Veiy dark brown fine grained silt loam witl'i liiglidecomposutg orgamc material


18-42 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witl'i minimal subrounded


42 - 60 2.5Y 4/4 0live brown glacial till witli moderate subroundedgravel content


Shovel Probe KSO7

O-32 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown fine grained silt loam with moderaterormded gravel content


Notes: Ground water at 30 cmbs.

Shovel Probe KSO8

O-25 1 0YR 3/2 Veiy dark brown silt/very fine sandy loam witliminimal subrounded gravel content




DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)

SEDIM_ENT DESCRIPTION CONTENTS

Shovel Probe KSO9

0-30 1 0YR 3/2 Veiy dark brown silt/veiy fine sandy loam witliminimal subrorinded gravel content



Shovel Probe KSIO

O-27 I OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrormded

gravel contentNo Criltural Material

27 - 44 1 0YR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown silt loam with minimalsubrounded gravel content


44-51 2.5Y 5/3 Liglit olive brown compact glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe KSII

0-25 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrormded



Shovel Probe KSl2

O-32 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrorinded


32 - 49 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown compact glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe KS13

O-36 IOYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded



Shovel Probe KS14

0-30 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrounded


30-41 IOYR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown silt loam No Criltural Material

Notes: Ground water at 3 7cmbs


DEPTH

BELOWSURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe KSl5

O-35 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli higli rotten and cliarredorganic material

No Culhiral Material


Shovel Probe KS16

O-35 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with mottled organic material No Cultural Material

35 - 56 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel content


56 - 63 2.5Y 5/3 Light olive brown compact glacial till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe KS17

O-37 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam mottled witli buried organics,disturbed

lNo Cultural Material

37 - 58 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam with minimal subrorutded

gravel content

No Culhiral Material


Shovel Probe KS18

O-44 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded


Notes: Grormd water at 3 7cmbs

Shovel Probe KS19

O-18 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt/veiy fine sandy loam No Cultural Material

18-32 10 YR 5/3 Brown silt/clay, veiy compact No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe KS20

O-28 IOYR 3/3 Dark brown fine sand/silt loam No Cultural Material

28 - 42 I OYR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown medium grained sand No Cultural Material

42 - 66 l OYR 3/3 Dark brown medirn'n grained sand witli reddenedsilt nodules


EXHIBIT D

SCHEDULE 2

DEPTHBELOW

SURFACE

(CM)


Shovel Probe KS21

O-42 I OYR 3/4 Dark yellowisli brown silt loam witli 3 subangularcobbles


42 - 52 1 0YR 5/3 Brown silt/clay, compact till No Cultural Material

Shovel Probe KS22

O-27 I OYR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimal subrounded

gravel contentNo Criltural Material

27-38 Sliglitly lighter 1 0YR 3/3 Dark brown silt loam witli minimalsubrormded gravel content


38-45 1 0YR 5/3 Brown silt/clay compact till No Cultural Material

Drayton Arcl'iaeology Repoit 041 5A 34

Documents

Cultural Resource Report - cob.org