Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-20 Exhibit D - Phase I Historical Resources1 Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, L.L.C. 453 McLaws Circle, Suite 3 Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 (757) 220-5023 Assessment and Probability Analysis Foxglove Solar, LLC 557.40 Acres Frederick County, Virginia August 15, 2018 Introduction In August 2018, Circa~ Cultural Resource Management, LLC (Circa~) completed an assessment and probability analysis on two discontiguous tracts that total 557.40 acres of land (Figure 1). The Project Area is roughly three miles northwest of the Town of Stephens City, Virginia on a rolling upland above Buffalo Marsh Run and Meadow Brook. The northern parcel is bordered by Marlboro Road to the north and rural residential lands to the east, south, and west, and by rural residential lands and Buffalo Marsh Run to the west. The southern parcel is bordered by Vaucluse Road to the north, Hites Road to the west, Klines Road and rural residential lands to the south, and rural residential lands to the east. Carol D. Tyrer, Principal Investigator, completed the walkover. Dawn M. Muir, Architectural Historian and Historian, completed the historic research and graphics. Figure 1. Approximate project locations, Middletown quad. 2 Environmental Background The primary reasons for incorporating environmental studies into archaeological projects are: to learn of possible environmental constraints or lack of constraints; to determine the presence or absence of critical resources that might have influenced site distribution, etc.; and to discover environmental factors—erosion, deposition, subsidence, and historic land use patterns—that might influence the integrity of archaeological sites once they have formed. Keeping these objectives in mind, a brief environmental summary of the Project Area is provided below. The tracts are situated in the Piedmont region and are comprised of wide, flat upland ridges separated by swales with moderate to steep side slopes towards the stream channels. The northern Project Area sits on a crest with the western and northern section draining via Buffalo Marsh Run and the eastern section draining via Meadow Brook. Elevations across the northern tract range from 754 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in the stream valley to 843 feet AMSL on the uplands. Presently, trees are evident along the fringes of the streams and along the edges of the fields and in areas where the ground is too rocky to cultivate. A large power line easement runs northwest to southeast across the tract. The southern Project Area sits on a crest with the southwestern section draining via Meadow Brook and the northeastern section draining via Vaucluse Springs. Elevations across the northern tract range from 740 feet AMSL in the stream valley to 822 feet AMSL on the uplands. Presently, trees are evident along the fringes of the streams and along the edges of the fields and in areas where the ground is too rocky to farm. A fruit orchard is in the northern section of the tract. A large power line easement runs northwest to southeast across the northeastern edge of the tract. Aerial photos from 1997 to the present show little change within the northern Project Area during the last 21 years. Aerial photos on the southern Project Area from 1997 to the present show where the apple trees were eventually taken down and removed. The owner indicated that the trees were cut down and the stumps were removed via heavy equipment, to clear the area for fields to grow crops. However, some development has occurred around the Project Areas during this period (Figures 2 - 5). Soils Soils maps and associated data provide an analysis of soil types within a geographic area. Despite comprehensive and detailed coverage of most areas by soils surveyors, researchers often miss microenvironments due to their small footprints. Unfortunately, resource rich microenvironments were often common sites of cultural activity. As such, this analysis of archaeological potential is a “best-guess” using the best available data. Well-drained, agriculturally- and horticulturally-productive soils proximal to transportation corridors were the best choices for historic period occupation. Secondary areas, such as those containing wet soils and acid soils, after improvement such as drainage and liming also may have also been suitable choices for historic occupation. No navigable waterways exist within the Project Area; thus, water travel is not a factor in the site probability analysis of this tract. 3 Figure 2. 1997 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. Figure 3. 2007 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. 4 Figure 4. 2013 aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. Figure 5. Current (2018) aerial view of Project Area, from Google Earth. 5 Areas of wet soils may have been attractive to Native American cultures. In these areas, edible herbaceous plant species may have been gathered and faunal species browsing these areas may have been hunted with success. Well-drained soils proximal to these resource- rich areas may have made adequate hunting and gathering campsites where the hunted and gathered resources were processed. These sites would have left an observable archaeological footprint. Little archaeological evidence would be located within the wet areas, the immediate locale of resource procurement. Areas containing gravelly soils may have been especially attractive to stone tool- manufacturing Native American cultures, but the level of attraction may have depended on the type and quality of the gravels available in these locations. Well-drained soils proximal to quarry-able, gravel-rich areas would have made adequate lithic material procurement campsites but in this case, archaeological materials may be located at both the campsites and the quarry sites. Soils Identified Within the Project Area At least 13 different soil types and soil type variants exist within the Project Area (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2018). These soil and soil types include Nicholson silt loam, 2% to 7% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 15% to 45% slopes; Carbo-Oaklet outcrop complex, 2% to 15% slopes; Carbo-Oaklet very rocky silt loams, 2% to 15% slopes; Oaklet silt loam, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 7% to 15% slopes; Oaklet silt loam, 2% to 7% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15% to 25% slopes; Massanetta loam; Carbo silt loam, 7% to 15% slopes; Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2% to 7% slopes; and Timberville silt loam, 2%-7% slopes (Figures 6 and 7 and Table 1). Each of these types and variants are described below including references to drainage, hunting and gathering potential, and horticultural and agricultural productivity potential. Further, conclusions regarding the suitability of each for historic and Native American occupation and archaeological site probability are also explained. Table 1. Soils Identified Within the Project Area Boundaries. Soil Symbol Soil Name Acres Within the Project Area Location Within the Project Area Percentage Within the Project Area 31B Nicholson silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 146.50 Southeastern parcel 26% 14C Frederick-Poplimento loams, 7%-15% slopes 95.40 Northeastern parcel 17% 16D Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 15%- 45% slopes 79.50 Northeastern parcel 14 7C Carbo-Oaklet outcrop complex, 2%-15% slopes 76.90 Southeastern parcel 14% 6C Carbo-Oaklet very rocky silt loams, 2%-15% slopes 58.00 Southeastern parcel 10% 32C Oaklet silt loam, 7%-15% slopes 39.40 Southeast and Northwest 7% 16C Frederick-Poplimento very rocky loams, 7%-15% slopes 21.70 Northwestern parcel 4% 6 Soil Symbol Soil Name Acres Within the Project Area Location Within the Project Area Percentage Within the Project Area 32B Oaklet silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 20.10 Northwestern and Southeastern parcel 4% 14D Frederick-Poplimento loams, 15%-25% slopes 19.00 Northwestern parcel 3% 29 Massanetta loam 4.40 Northwestern parcel 1% 5C Carbo silt loam, 7%-5% slopes 2.10 Northwestern parcel Less than 1% 14B Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2%-7% slopes 1.80 Southeastern parcel Less than 1% 40B Timberville silt loam, 2%-7% slopes 1.10 Northwestern parcel Less than 1% Nicholson Series (31B) Nicholson soils are very-deep, moderately-well-drained, slowly-permeable soils formed in the mantle of loess underlain by a residuum of limestone, calcareous shale, and siltstone (NRCS 2018). These soils are located on rolling upland ridgetops and shoulder slopes. The depth to limestone, calcareous shale, or siltstone is greater than 60 inches in these soils, which ranges in acidity from mildly alkaline to strongly acid. This soil is mostly cultivated and can support corn, burley tobacco, small grains, truck and fruit crops, hay, and pasture. Some areas are used for urban-suburban development. Those areas with native vegetation can support hardwoods, mainly oaks, maples, black walnut, hickory, ash, beech, elm, hackberry, black locust, Kentucky coffee tree, eastern red cedar. Frederick Series (14C, 16D, 16C, 14D, 14B) Frederick soils are very-deep, well-drained, moderately-permeable soils formed in the residuum derived mainly from dolomitic limestone with interbeds of sandstone, siltstone, and shale, and are located on nearly level to very steep uplands (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness is more than 60 inches with a depth to bedrock greater than 72 inches for this soil, which ranges from very strongly acid to moderately acid. This soil features a surface runoff ranging from low to very high. Most of these soils have been cleared and cultivated with crops such as corn, small grain, hay, tobacco, and apple orchards. Most of the steeper areas are in pasture or forest. The native vegetation includes mostly hardwoods such as oak, hickory, maple, and yellow poplar. 7 Figure 6. Northern Project Area soil map, from NRCS website. 8 Figure 7. Southern Project Area soil map, from NRCS website. 9 Poplimento Series (14C, 16D, 16C, 14D, 14B) Poplimento soils are very-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soils that formed in the residuum of a mixture of shale, limestone, siltstone, fine sandstone bedrock found in the Ridge and Valley portion of the Shenandoah Valley (NRCS 2018). These soils are located in the gently sloping to very steep uplands in the Shenandoah Valley. Solum thickness ranges from 40 inches to 70 inches with a depth to bedrock, shale, or siltstone bedrock greater than 60 inches in this very strongly through slightly acid soil. This soil features a slow to very rapid surface runoff. This soil is generally used for crops or pasture. Where cultivated, this soil can support apple orchards, peach orchards, small grains, corn, and mixed hay. The few areas with woodland consist mainly of upland oaks, hickory, yellow poplar, walnut, and ash. Carbo Series (7C, 6C, 5C) Carbo soil is a moderately-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soil formed in the material weathered from limestone bedrock located in the nearly-level to very steep uplands in the Appalachian Ridges and Valleys (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness and depth to bedrock ranges from 20 inches to 40 inches in this soil, which ranges from very strongly acid to neutral. This soil features a medium to very rapid surface runoff. Areas that have been cleared are typically used for cropland or pasture and can support crops such as corn, small grain, and hay. Where forested, this soil can support northern red oak, yellow poplar, hickory, maple, black walnut, locust, eastern red cedar, and Virginia pine. Oaklet Series (7C, 6C, 32C, 32B) Oaklet soil is very-deep, well-drained, slowly-permeable soil formed in the material weathered from limestone bedrock on gently undulating to steep upland slopes in the Shenandoah Valley (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness is greater than 60 inches with a depth to limestone bedrock ranging from five feet to more than 14 feet. Soil reactions range from very strongly acid to slightly acid throughout. This soil features a slow to medium surface runoff. These soils are typically used for crops or pasture with minor acreage in woodland. Where cultivated, this soil can support corn, small grain, and hay. Where wooded this soil can support upland oaks, yellow poplar, hickory, maple, eastern red cedar, and Virginia pine. Massanetta Series (29) Massanetta soil is a very-deep, moderately-well-drained, moderately-permeable soil formed in alluvial material derived from upland soils found in the narrow flood plains normally below springs and having carbonate-charged water flowing from limestone bedrock (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness ranges from 20 inches to 40 inches while depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. Soil acidity ranges from slightly to moderately alkaline and effervesces with acid throughout. This soil features a slow surface runoff. Most areas of this soil are cleared and used for permanent pasture. Other areas are used for corn or native vegetation such as mixed hardwoods. Timberville Series (40B) Timberville soil consists of very-deep, well-drained, moderately-permeable soils that formed in alluvial/colluvial materials and can be found on colluvial fans, concave areas, 10 and heads of drainageways or low areas adjacent to upland drainageways throughout the limestone valley (NRCS 2018). Solum thickness and depth to bedrock is greater than 60 inches. Soil acidity ranges from extremely acid to slightly acid unless limed. This soil features a slow to moderate surface runoff. This soil is typically cleared and used for crops or pasture. The remainder of this soil is wooded with native mixed hardwood vegetation. PREVIOUSLY-RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES Circa~ performed an archival search for the Foxglove tracts using the Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) online V-CRIS system on August 16, 2018 and August 21, 2018. This research was completed to determine if historic resources exist within the Project Area boundaries. The search identified no archaeological resources and five architectural resources within the Project Area boundaries. Research was also conducted to determine if resources existed within one mile of the Project Area boundaries. Twelve archaeological resources and 70 architectural resources are present within a one-mile radius of the Project Area boundaries. Table 2 lists all the resources within one-mile of the Project Area boundaries. Figures 8 - 11 show the approximate Project Area boundaries (yellow- shaded area) and resources within proximity. Any resources shaded green on Table 2 are within the Project Area. No VDHR easements are situated within the Project Areas. Five previous Phase I archaeological surveys have been conducted within one mile of the Project Area (Figures 12 and 13). The two most relevant Phase I reports include two pipeline surveys that transect parts of the northern Project Area. These surveys include a Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the VA State Line-Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line (TrAIL) Project, Frederick and Warren Counties and the addendum report conducted in 2008 and 2010 respectively by GAI Consultants, Inc. Three other surveys were conducted near the Project Area and these include a Phase I Archaeological Investigation of the Meadowbrook Substations conducted in 1985 by Thunderbird Archaeological Associates, as well as two Phase I surveys conducted by James Madison University (JMU) Archaeological Resource Center/Laboratory. JMU conducted a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment of the Middle Marsh Tract in Frederick County in 2011 and A Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment of the Middletown Woods Tract in Frederick County in 2012. The two surveys completed by GAI on the two tracts did not locate any archaeological resources within the project area. They did relocate the Miller cemetery and identify a standing house and barn complex on the two parcels. Table 2. Previously-Recorded Cultural Resources Within a One-Mile Radius of Project Area Boundaries. VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation Archaeological Resources 44FK0051 Native American Camp Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0055 Native American Historic Terrestrial, open air, single dwelling Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 11 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 44FK0056 Native American Artifact scatter Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0057 19th century Historic artifact scatter, chimney fall Phase I survey, 11/81 None made 44FK0712 20th century A lime kiln with an additional structure noted Phase I survey 1/12 None made 44FK0720 19th century Lime Kiln Phase I survey by 1/12 None made 44FK0767 19th century 20th century Tabler Farm Complex, three separate farmsteads and a springhouse Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0768 19th century 20th century Tabler Cemetery, five graves present in two rows, eight internments recorded Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0769 18th century 19th century Tabler Farm Road, 13 feet wide, extends from farmhouse to Marsh Brook Lane Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0770 19th century Merritt’s Camp, encampment of Brigadier General Wesley Merritt’s First Calvary Division, Battle of Cedar Creek, 1864 Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0772 18th century 19th century 20th century East Road, running from Dr. Shipley’s “Belle View” Farm to Hite Mille Road Phase I survey 7/08 None made 44FK0778 (034-5193) 18th century 19th century 20th century Nieswander’s Cemetery, 22 graves associated with the family cemetery Phase I survey 7/08 and 1/17 None made Architectural Resources 034-0002 18th century 19th century Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historic Park aka Isaac Hite Jr. House aka Cedar Creek Battlefield and Belle Grove aka Belle Grove Plantation, 336 Belle Grove Road Route 727, resource includes 3,713 acres that include historic landscapes, monuments, river fords, military encampments, and plantation houses Phase I survey 2/91 Listed on the Virginia Landmark Register 11/8/68 Listed on the National Historic Landmark 8/11/69 Listed on the National Register of Historic Places 8/11/69 and 2/2/03 and 8/11/1969 034-0076 ca 1870 Ash House aka Deerfield Acres, 6124 Middle Road, resource includes a house, a chicken coop, a kitchen, three garages, three vehicle sheds, a barn, and a landscape wall Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0075 ca 1870 Stickley House, 6519 Valley Pike, resource includes a house, silo, two barns, swimming pool, and a shed Phase I survey 9/08 None made 12 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0077 ca 1800 Bauserman House, 6127 Middle Road, resource includes house, spring house, shed, privy, well house, and two archaeological sites Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0084 ca 1790 General Carson House aka Pleasant Green, resource includes the home of General James Carson, three sheds, chicken coop, hog pen, privy barn, springhouse, corncrib, and a family cemetery Phase I survey. 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0138 See also 034-0220 ca 1810 Inn at Vaucluse Spring aka Vaucluse, 231 Vaucluse Spring Lane, resource includes house, workshop, millhouse, two secondary dwellings, a barn, a swimming pool, two sheds, and an archaeological site Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined eligible 6/18/09 034-0139 ca 1815 Rust Hill aka Valerie Hill, 1687 Marlboro Road, resource includes house, secondary dwelling, a meat house, and two sheds Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-0140 ca 1840 Baldwin-Clark House aka Buffalo Marsh, resource includes a house, chicken house, shed, school, and a barn Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined eligible 8/16/93 034-0141 ca 1830 Waveland, Route 623, resource includes a house, chicken coop, shed, swimming pool, secondary dwelling, smoke house, garage, workshop and a family cemetery Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-0191 ca 1870 Vaucluse Station, Route 638, resource includes a depot, demolished Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR not eligible 3/16/09 034-0228 ca 1900 Sager House, Route 625, resource includes a house, two barns, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0229 ca 1900 Fishel House, Route 625, resource includes a house and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0230 ca 1900 House, Route 625, resource includes a house, garage, barn and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0231 ca 1840 House, Route 634, resource includes a house, gatepost entry, and a garage Phase I survey 1/89 None made 13 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0232 ca 1900 Walters House, Route 625, resource includes a house and a garage Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0233 ca 1870 The Hank Walters House, Route 625, resource includes one house and several sheds Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0234 ca 1900 House, Route 625, resource includes a house and two sheds Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0235 ca 1880 Tenant House for Western View Farms, Route 625, resource includes a house and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0236 ca 1840 Western View Farm, Route 625, resource includes a house, spring house, barn, and a shed Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0237 ca 1810 Abel Tract aka Cedar Creek Battlefield aka Rienzi Knoll aka Dinges House, 294 Rienzi Knoll Lane, resource includes 34.566 acres of battlefield, historic open space, agricultural resources and archaeological potential. Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0238 ca 1875 Epworth United Methodist Church aka Epworth Chapel, resource includes a church and a modern concrete block building Phase I survey 1/89 None made 034-0239 ca 1870 House, Route 625, resource includes house, smoke house, barn and a garage Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0240 ca 1900 The Cooke House, Route 638, resource includes house, barn, animal shelter, and two sheds Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0241 ca 1870 House, Route 638, resource includes a house, a barn, and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0242 ca 1810 Rickard House aka Rock Hill Dairy Farm, Route 759, resource includes a house, garage, barn, shed and a silo Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0243 ca 1880 Rickard House, Route 759, resource includes a house, smoke house, corncrib, privy, barn, three sheds, and an orchard Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 14 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0244 ca 1910 Brumback-Huffman House aka Win-Liz Farm, Route 759, resource includes house, smokehouse, corncrib, shelter, barn, shed, and a secondary dwelling Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0254 ca 1830 Miller House, Route 631, resource includes a house, shed, smoke house, and a cemetery Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0259 ca 1880 Cedar Cliff Presbyterian Church aka Unitarian Universal Church aka Unity of the Shenandoah Church, 6460 Valley Pike Road, resource includes one Gothic Revival Church Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0260 ca 1870 House at Vaucluse, 6470 Valley Pike Road, resource includes a house, smoke house, shed, garage, and a chicken house Phase I survey, 8/08 None made 034-0262 ca 1840 Mildred Kline House, 236 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, a garage, shed and a barn Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0263 ca 1880 House, 782 Hites Road, resource includes a house, shed, and two garages Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-0264 ca 1870 Shiley Farm, 856 Hites Road, resource includes a house, garage, privy, two sheds, a barn, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 3/16/09 034-0266 ca 1880 Deerfield School, Route 638, resource includes two school buildings Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0267 ca 1870 House, Route 638, resource includes a house and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0268 ca 1810 Lindamood House, Route 638, resource includes a house and a kitchen Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0269 ca 1820 House, Route 638, resource includes, house, shed, smoke house, barn, and a corncrib Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-0303 093-0106 ca. 1861 Cedar Creek Battlefield, Route 11 South (Frederick, Shenandoah and Warren Counties), resource includes a battlefield, and one structure, the Heater House, currently under restoration Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined potentially eligible 3/16/09 15 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-0428 ca 1830 Conard House, 478 Klines Mill Road Route 633, resource includes a house, smoke house, foundation, secondary dwelling, and a shed Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 6/18/09 034-0429 ca 1800 Farmhouse, Route 633, resource includes a house, stable, smoke house, barn, and an apple storage building Phase I survey, 8/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/24/94 034-1018 ca 1840 B.F. Stickley House, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, garage, chicken house, shed, and a foundation Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1019 ca 1800 F. Estes Kline House, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, privy, shed, barn, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1020 ca 1900 Stickley House, Route 11, resource includes a house, chicken house, animal shelter, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1021 ca 1900 House, 6688 Valley Pike, resource includes a house and a garage Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-1022 ca 1890 Kiln, Route 11 South, resource includes a brick- lined kiln Phase I survey. 9/2008 None made 034-1023 ca 1880 W. H. Dinges House aka Martha Downes House, 6773 Valley Pike Road, resource includes a house, garage, modern outbuilding, chicken house, barn, and a modern glass manufacturing building Phase I survey 9/08 None made 034-1025 ca 1929 Wise-Chandell House, Route 11, resource includes a house, garage, privy, mobile home, chicken house, and a smoke house Phase I survey 9/08 None made 034-1026 ca 1900 Bayliss-Seaman House, Route 11, resource includes a house, a chicken house, a smoke house, a stable, barn, and a garage Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1027 ca 1940 Nixon’s Motel aka Plantation Garden Apartments, Route 11, resource includes one house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 16 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-1028 ca 1873 David Dinges House aka Sunny Side, 7114 Valley Pike, resource includes a house, corncrib, shed, garage, barn, kitchen, meat house, and a cemetery Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1029 ca 1900 E.H. Randall House aka Valley View Farm, Route 11 South, resource includes a house, shed, two carriage houses, privy, shed, barn, a stable, granary and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/91 None made 034-1079 ca 1903 Harvey A Richard House, Route 628, resource includes house, shed, barn, root cellar, kitchen and a garage Phase I survey 7/89 None made 034-1080 ca 1830 Snapp-Fewell House, 6286 Middle Road, resource includes, house, smokehouse, chicken house, privy, and two sheds Phase I survey 1/1/89 and 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 6/18/09 034-1404 No date Craig-Miller House, resource includes one house Phase I survey 4/92 None made 034-1405 ca 1815 Sleepy Hollow Farm aka Tuttle-Robinson-Bauserman House, Route 631, resource includes a house, barn, shed, and a pumphouse Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1406 ca 1920 Rothgeb-Morgan House, Route 631 and Route 625, resource includes a house, garage, privy, and a chicken house Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1407 ca 1913 Fred W. Ridings House aka Ridings House, Route 625, resource includes house, kitchen, barn, smoke house, well, chicken house, and a shed Phase I survey 1/1/89 None made 034-1422 ca 1890 Judge Rice House aka Kenner House aka Glenmore Farm, 239 Klines Mill Road, resource includes a house, smoke house, barn and a chicken house Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-1438 ca 1870 Richards-Fauble House aka W.H. Ridings House, Route 628, resource includes a house, a barn, shed, and a smoke house Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 17 VDHR Survey Number Date of resource Description of resource Survey Information Recommendation 034-1439 ca 1917 Luther Snap House aka Sunnyside Farm, Route 628, resource includes a house, privy shed, smokehouse and a barn Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1440 ca 1830 Tewalt-Solenberger House, Route 628, resource includes a house, smoke house, barn, shed, corncrib, and kitchen Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1441 ca 1890 Rogers-Solenberger House, Route 628, resource includes a house, shed, chicken house, barn and an orchard Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined not eligible 1/5/93 034-1552 ca 1927 Bridge, Route 633, resource includes a slab bridge crossing Meadow Brook Phase I survey 1/95 None made 034-5073 ca 1900 House, 263 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, shed, and a garage Phase I survey. 9/08 None made 034-5074 ca 1930 House, 265 Vaucluse Road Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-5075 ca 1880 Woodbrine Farm aka Woodbine Barn, 829 Vaucluse Road, resource includes a house, two sheds and a barn Phase I survey 1/1/89 VDHR determined potentially eligible 6/18/09 034-5077 ca 1831 Harper’s Ferry and Valley Branch of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad aka Winchester and Potomac Railroad Phase I survey 9/08 VDHR determined not eligible 3/16/09 034-5085 ca 1838 Miller Cemetery, south of Route 631, resource includes a family cemetery with seven marked burials and several unmarked, a stone fence delineates the cemetery Phase I survey. 5/09 None made 034-5192 See also 44FK0767 and 44FK0768 ca 1885 Tabler Cemetery aka Tabler Farm, Marsh Brook Lane, resource includes a house and a family cemetery Phase I survey 7/08 None made 034-5193 ca 1780 Nieswander’s Cemetery, Chapel Road, resource includes at least 22 graves Phase I survey, 7/08 None made 18 Figure 8. VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within a one- mile radius of the northern Project Area boundaries. Figure 9. VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within a one- mile radius of the southern Project Area boundaries. 19 Figure 10. Detailed VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within close proximity to the northern Project Area boundaries. Figure 11. Detailed VDHR V-CRIS map showing previously-identified resources within close proximity to the southern Project Area boundaries. 20 Figure 12. VDHR V-CRIS map showing location of previous Phase I surveys and VDHR easements near the northern Project Area. Figure 13. VDHR V-CRIS map showing location of previous Phase I surveys and VDHR easements near the southern Project Area. 21 Historic Map Review A review of historic quad maps did show some development near the Miller house and cemetery within the northern Project Area during the early part of the 20th century, although this development does not appear to continue through the latter half of the century (Figures 14 - 17). A review of historic quad maps did show some development near the house and barns within the northern and southern section of the southern Project Area during the early part of the 20th century. These maps do show development around the Project Area. The Project Areas are shown as mostly open fields with forested areas coinciding where the rocky outcrops were noted during the field visit. Figure 14. Detail of 1937 Middletown quad. 22 Figure 15. Detail of 1966 Middletown quad. Figure 16. Detail of 1986 Middletown quad. 23 Figure 17. Detail of 1999 Middletown quad. Results and Summary This study was conducted to provide information on the current condition of the property, as well as to assess the potential for the presence of archaeological or architectural resources within the Project Area. Fieldwork was completed in August 2018 and included a pedestrian walkover of the tract to identify any obvious archaeological or architectural resources and the site potential of various landforms. Northern Tract Architectural Resources Two previously-identified architectural resources were located on the project tract and two previously-identified resources are located adjacent to the tract (Plates 1 through 14). Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Within the Project Area Site 034-0254 Site 034-0254 is the circa 1830 Miller house identified in 1989 by Maral Kalbian. She indicated that the main house was in ruinous condition with only a five-course, American- bond brick chimney remaining. She also noted a shed, a fine coarse-rubble limestone smoke/meat house, and a cemetery. She did not make any recommendation as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and according to the VDHR V-CRIS form no further survey work has occurred at the site. 24 The site is inaccurately mapped in the V-CRIS system and the site is actually located to the northwest of the cemetery, on the eastern edge of a ridge crest. The structure currently consists of a western gable end brick chimney and a portion of the northern wall. The main brick structure rests on a limestone foundation with the limestone foundation evident around a cellar/basement. The chimney has three fireboxes, indicating a basement/cellar and two floors above. There is a large mound filled with brick rubble evident on the southern side of the structure. There are numerous loose bricks within the cellar/basement and strewn around the yard of the structure. In addition, there are several architectural timber beams with square joints on the ends that match the notches on the brick walls. To the northeast of the main structure is the remains of a stone foundation that probably represents an outbuilding. To the north of the main building is a fresh-water seep. Also, to the north is a road lined with limestone rubble. There is an overgrown area to the south of the main structure, where an additional structure may have stood at one time. Plate 1. View of brick ruins, looking southwest. 25 Plate 2. View of brick ruins, looking south. Plate 3. View of chimney showing the three fire places, looking southwest. 26 Plate 4. View of fireplace in the cellar/basement, looking west. Plate 5. View of fireplace on the first floor, looking west. 27 Plate 6. View of fireplace on the second floor, looking west. Plate 7. View of rear of brick chimney, looking east. 28 Plate 8. Detail view of the stone foundation, interior of cellar, looking west. Plate 9. Detail view of the joints and notches in brick and the timber (notice notch in brick and matching joint on timber beam end) for the first floor of the structure, looking south. 29 Plate 10. View of collapsed wall, looking west. Plate 11. View of stone foundation of an outbuilding, looking northeast. 30 Plate 12. View of a fresh-water seep located to the north of the brick foundation, looking north. Plate 13. View of road, looking north. 31 Plate 14. View of overgrown area where another structure may have stood, looking south. Site 034-5085 The Miller cemetery is located in an open field that currently functions as a cow pasture. The cemetery has been neglected and is overgrown. GAI noted that many of the headstones are illegible and broken, thus making it difficult to decipher the exact number of burials. There are seven marked headstones, all of which are marble, and there are also several unmarked fieldstones. A stone fence delineates the cemetery but has collapsed in places. All the surnames on the markers are Miller, with first names of Thomas S., Bettie, Cassandra, Joseph, and Mary. GAI suggested that the cemetery has no connection with significant events, themes, or trends in history. As such, they recommended the site as not eligible for listing under Criteria A. No information identifying any person interred in the cemetery as significant in local, state, or national history can be located. Therefore, they recommended this resource not eligible for National Register of Historic Places listing under Criteria B. The cemetery lacks distinctive funerary architecture and does not utilize a specific plan. For these reasons, GAI suggested that the Miller Cemetery not eligible for National Register of Historic Places listing under Criteria C. In addition, GAI noted that there were no secondary resources associated with the cemetery. GAI may have looked at the VDHR V-CRIS mapped location of Site 034-0254 and not seen the ruins during their survey efforts and the correct location of the ruins may have been outside of their area of potential effect. The cemetery is currently overgrown with vegetation (Plates 15 through 21). Portions of the stone walls have collapsed or have been pushed down by the cattle. The graves are laid out in north to south rows, with both headstones and footstones evident. It appears that the markers were purchased, as many have scroll designs along the top. 32 A review of the records on Ancestory.com indicate that the Miller family lived in the area most of their lives. The 1850 census shows that Thomas Cox Miller was living at the tract with his 45-year old wife Cassandra, and their sons, 20-year old Joseph Atwell, 19-year old Robert Washington, 17-year old Thomas Madison, and 15-year old Dudley L. In addition, they had a two-year old daughter Mary Ophelia who died in 1834. All the Millers are listed as born in Virginia. Both Thomas M. and Dudley L. are listed as attending school within the year. The census list all the males in the Miller household as farmers. Thomas C. is credited with $20,000.00 in real estate value. A much higher value than his neighbors, whose farms valued an average of $3,300.00. The marriage license indicates that Thomas C. and Cassandra J. McKay were married in Frederick County on January 5, 1829. Their son, Thomas Madison Miller is listed on his marriage license as a doctor and the 1860 census listed him as a physician. Thomas M. attended the Delaware College in Newark, Delaware in 1855. In 1855 to 1856, he attended the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia. In 1856 to 1857, he attended the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In 1857, he received his M.D. degree from the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His thesis was titled Typhoid fever as it occurred in the Valley of Virginia. In 1860, he practiced medicine in the Magisterial District No. 8 in Frederick County, Virginia. In 1861, he is listed as a Surgeon, serving with the 51st VA Militia, Berkley County, Virginia ["not yet commissioned"]. In November 1861, he is listed as a Surgeon, serving with the 51st VA Militia, Bath, Morgan County, Virginia ["not yet commissioned, but recommended"]. On November 5, 1861, he married Margaret Celia "Maggie" Davis, in Frederick County, Virginia. Thomas M. died January 18, 1890 and is buried in the Green Hill Cemetery in Frederick County, Virginia (Plate 22). Maggie died in 1930 and is buried next to her husband (Plate 23). The 1880 census shows that Thomas C. Miller was 78 and was living at the tract with his 44-year old son Dudley L. Both Thomas C. and Dudley L. were listed as widowers, and their trades as a farmer. The census indicates that Thomas C’s father was born in Pennsylvania and his mother in Virginia. The high value of the Miller farm would indicate that it was a fairly-large estate; however, the slave records did not indicate that Thomas C. owned any slaves. It could be that the farm was used to raise livestock, which would not require as many laborers. 33 Plate 15. View of cemetery, looking southwest. Plate 16. View of cemetery, looking east. 34 Plate 17. View of grave marker, looking west. 35 Plate 18. View of grave marker, looking west. Plate 19. View of grave marker, looking west. 36 Plate 20. View of grave marker, looking west. Plate 21. View of cemetery, looking east. 37 Plate 22. View of Thomas M. Miller’s grave marker, Green Hill Cemetery. 38 Plate 23. View of Maggie Miller’s grave marker, Green Hill Cemetery. 39 Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Adjacent to the Project Area Site 034-0077 This circa 1770 house and springhouse was identified by Michael Quinn in 1973 and is located on the south side of Marlboro Road, near the junction with Middle Road just to the west of the Project Area. Mr. Quinn’s research indicated that in 1973 the house was owned by Ralph Bauserman, who also owned Site 034-0076, Deerfield Acres. At the time of Mr. Quinn’s survey, the house was rented. Mr. Quinn noted that the property had passed through the same ownership as Deerfield Acres, and was originally purchased by Charles Bauserman in 1918 from Charles Snapp, who acquired the property from Mr. Tevault in 1917. Mr. Quinn noted that the type of moldings in the house dated it to circa 1770. He indicated that the structure was expanded originally from a log cabin with stone chimneys at each gable end. He noted a one room addition on the west side on the structure. The original structure has vertical tongue and groove panel partitions throughout. The structure seems to have survived basically untouched and was suffering only from lack of upkeep. Mr. Quinn thought the structure was in fair condition, and under no threat except for lack of upkeep. He noted the following original architectural elements were present at the site: House: A-Door, original 37 inches wide and six foot- two inches high; B-Window, original 55-1/2 inches wide with a 26-inch sill, and CR 37 inches; C-Door, original six-foot four inches high and 34 inches wide; and D-Window of addition 28 inches by 44 ½ inches, with 6/6 double-hung windows. In 1989, the house was resurveyed by Maral Kalbian and she noted the house and spring house as well as a barn, frame shed, and a meat house. One of the sheds is timber-frame, with vertical-board siding and a shed roof. The other shed is concrete-block with a shed roof, and Ms. Kalbian thought small enough to be a privy. Ms. Kalbian noted that a fine course-rubble limestone springhouse with wooden grills stood to the east of the main house adjacent to Buffalo Marsh Run. She believed that while the Bauserman House once functioned as a productive farm, that is was now stands vacant and abandoned. She noted that the complex no longer possessed an intact assemblage of outbuildings and did not currently reflect early 19th century farming practices of Frederick County. She recommended that the complex was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A as this resource no longer conveys its historic function. No evidence could be located that connects this property to any significant individuals in history. As such, this resource was recommended ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria B. The main dwelling had lost its integrity through alterations and neglect and coupled with most of its associated agricultural outbuildings no longer standing, further subtracts from its architectural significance. Ms. Kalbian recommended the complex as not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria C. In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. The only extant secondary resource that was observed from the roadway was a wood-framed shed. They noted that the house 40 was constructed circa 1800 and consisted of a two-story frame vernacular house on a continuous-stone foundation. It appears that the dwelling is clad in wood siding and topped with a standing-seam metal side gable roof. The fenestration consists of 6/6 and 9/6 double-hung, wood sash windows, but most of the glass panes are no longer intact. A one- story gable roof addition has been appended to the east elevation. They noted that the house was vacant and in very poor condition. GAI recommended that this resource is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. GAI did not receive a response to their request for property access. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria C. In 2010, after gaining property access, GAI noted a house, spring house, well house, and remnants of the frame shed were extant. The privy, barn, and meat house structures were not observed. GAI noted that while previous surveys identify the main house as a log structure, this claim cannot be conclusively substantiated. Their field visit revealed rough-hewn weatherboard siding under exposed sections of the asbestos-shingle siding. No log framing was observed. The roof of the original section of the house is clad in corrugated metal, and three V-crimp metal covers the roof of the addition. Pictures taken from November 2008 and April 2010 showed the continued deterioration of the siding, roof, and the second floor. The spring house stands to the southeast of the main dwelling and features coursed stone construction. They noted that the gable roof on the springhouse was clad in corrugated metal but has collapsed. Only one pegged vent remained intact, while the remaining window and door apertures are now open. They noted that the timber frame shed was no longer intact. Although portions of the timber framing still stand; the wood siding and corrugated roofing material have deteriorated and lay on the ground. The second shed recorded in the 1989 survey appears to instead be a well house. The concrete-block well house is topped by a shed roof clad with standing-seam metal. It features a strap-hinge wood door on the façade. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. No definitive evidence that the main dwelling features log construction was observed at the time of survey. The exposed corners underneath the asbestos-shingle siding do not feature notching. In addition, this resource remains unoccupied, and due to neglect, the dwelling and its associated outbuildings continue to severely decline. There is no note on the site form indicating if VDHR concurred with GIA’s 2010 recommendations. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the house, springhouse, and well house during their walkover. Plates 24 through 27 show the current condition of the structures. House The house is a circa 1800, two-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame house clad in painted-white wood weatherboard and resting on a rusticated stone foundation with two exterior-end rusticated stone chimneys. The roof is covered in standing seam metal and collapsed exposing the wood framing and the interior. Most of the windows have been 41 removed. The entrance on the façade is not visible. There is a one-story, one-bay, side- gable, wood-frame addition attached to the side (east) elevation. Springhouse The springhouse is a circa 1800, one-story, one-bay, side-gable, rusticated stone building resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof has been removed and a tree is growing from the center of the springhouse. The windows have been removed. The entrance on the façade is not visible. Well House The well house is a circa 1900, one-story, one-bay, shed roof, concrete-block building resting on a below-grade concrete-block foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the well house. The entrance on the façade is not visible. Plate 24. View of main house, springhouse, and well house at Site 034-0077, looking north. 42 Plate 25. View of main house at Site 034-0077, looking north. Plate 26. View of main house at Site 034-0077, looking southwest. 43 Plate 27. View of springhouse and well house at Site 034-0077, looking north. Site 034-0139 This circa 1815 house was identified by Michael Quinn in 1973 and is located on the south side of Marlboro Road down a long, tree-lined, paved driveway. Mr. Quinn indicated that the main structure had flat arches over the windows and the basement windows had wood louvers. The rear ell had an enclosed porch. He noted the following secondary structures a circa 1750 central stone chimney southwest of house, which he believed may have been a slave quarters or an original house; a circa 1880 five-course American-bond brick meat house with stepped cornice; a circa 1950 wood shed; and a 1960 machine shed. In 1991, the house was resurveyed by Maral Kalbian. The VDHR V-CRIS site form contains no additional information about her survey. In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the two-and-a-half- story dwelling was built circa 1815. The structure’s exterior walls were laid in common- bond brick, and a standing-seam metal gable roof tops the house. The fenestration consists of 6/6, double-hung, wood, sash windows with brick lintels. A one-story porch with Tuscan columns is located on the facade, while the rear ell features an enclosed porch. The only extant secondary resource that was observed from the roadway was the stone chimney stack southwest of the main dwelling. GAI recommended that this resource is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after 44 gaining property access, GAI noted a house, chimney stack, meat house, and machine shed were extant. The shed structure was not observed. GIA indicated that the two-and-a-half- story main house was constructed on a continuous-stone foundation, with common-bond brick walls. The side-gable roof is clad with standing-seam metal, and a stepped cornice trims the roofline. Interior brick chimneys mark the gable ends. A one-story, one-bay pedimented portico supported by Tuscan columns and a wood balustrade is located on the facade. The windows have been replaced with 6/6, double-hung, vinyl, sash windows and feature brick jack arches. The two-story rear ell features an enclosed porch and a one-bay garage addition. GAI noted no changes to the remaining chimney stack have occurred since the previous survey. The meat house is located southwest of the main dwelling. It stands one-story tall on a continuous stone foundation. The exterior walls are laid in five- course common bond brick, and a standing-seam metal gable roof tops the building. A stepped cornice trims the roofline, and a recessed door marks the northeast elevation. The modern machine shed, located south of the main dwelling, have a foundation and walls constructed with concrete blocks. A side-gable roof tops the building and is clad with standing-seam metal. Two vehicle doors mark the east elevation, and four-light fixed sash windows comprise the fenestration. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. GAI indicated that this resource did not demonstrate a clear and definitive association with any significant themes or events. GAI could not locate any information connecting the current owner or previous owners as significant individuals in local or Virginia history. The main dwelling and its associated outbuildings stand as unexceptional examples of common architectural types in the region. Additionally, the secondary residence associated with the chimney stack is no longer standing. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C. The VDHR V-CRIS form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places Circa~ identified the house, chimney stack, meat house, and machine shop. Today, the complex is used as a winery, with a small vineyard and outdoor seating areas located around the house. Plates 28 through 36 illustrate the current conditions of the structure. Plate 37 illustrates the viewshed from the project area looking towards the complex and Plates 38 and 39 illustrate the viewshed looking from the complex towards the project area. House The house is a circa 1815, two-story, five-bay, side-gable, Georgian style, common-bond brick house resting on a rusticated stone foundation with two interior-end common-bond brick chimneys with corbelled caps and metal vent caps. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. There is a one-story, one-bay, poured-concrete porch under a front-gable supported by painted-white wood columns with a painted-white wood balustrade. Four poured-concrete steps flanked by painted-white wood railings lead from the porch to the driveway. Sash, double-hung, 6/6, wood-frame windows flanked by painted-black wood shutters are typical on the façade and elevations. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, wood-panel door with a transom. There are multiple additions attached to the main house. 45 Chimney Stack The chimney stack is a circa 1815, rusticated stone tiered chimney. The building associated with the chimney has been demolished. Meat House The meat house is a circa 1815, one-story, one-bay, front-gable, common-bond brick building resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the meat house. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, vertical wood plank door. Machine Shop The machine shop is a circa 1900, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, concrete-block building resting on a poured-concrete slab-on-grade foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the shop. The entrance on the façade is a single- leaf, wood-panel door with lights. There is also a wooden sliding door on the façade. Plate 28. View of driveway at Site 034-0139, looking north. 46 Plate 29. View of main house at Site 034-0139, looking south. Plate 30. View of front of main house at Site 034-0139, looking southeast. 47 Plate 31. View of rear of main house at Site 034-0139, looking northeast. Plate 32. View of rear of the main house at Site 039-0139, looking north. 48 Plate 33. View of the side of the main house at Site 034-0139, looking east. Plate 34. View of the chimney stack at Site 034-0139, looking west. 49 Plate 35. View of meat house at Site 034-0139, looking southwest. Plate 36. View of the machine shop at Site 034-0139, looking southwest. 50 Plate 37. View from the Project Area, looking east towards the adjacent house complex at Site 034-0139. Plate 38. View from the edge of the yard at Site 034-0139 towards the Project Area, looking west. 51 Plate 39. View of from the yard at Site 034-0139 looking southwest towards the Project Area and Site 034-0077. Probability Model All open, exposed areas were inspected for the presence of artifacts and signs of cultural features. Circa~ did note a cemetery and the remains of a brick structure at the site. In addition, 20 judgmental shovel tests were excavated to sample the stratigraphy of the landforms. Two soil layers were noted on several of the aprons and within the more defined floodplains along Buffalo Marsh Run. A discussion with the landowner indicated that except for the existing cemetery and house foundations, he was unaware of any cultural resources on his property. He indicated that he had not plowed the northern fields and used them for raising cattle and hay production. The southern fields he cultivated every year. The 263.1-acre Project Area consists of a series of upland ridges separated by drainages and swales (Plates 40 through ). The slopes are moderate to steep with large swales noted between the level uplands. The northwestern section of the Project Area consists of an upland ridge with stone outcroppings. Shovel tests revealed one soil stratum under a thick root mat on the uplands. On some of the upland tops and side slopes where the rock outcrops were noted, Stratum A consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy clay under a thin root mat, 0.22 to 0. 38 feet thick, overlying a reddish-brown clay subsoil. Numerous natural stones were noted within the Stratum A fill. Buffalo Marsh Run is situated just outside of the western edge of the Project Area at the base of the steep slope and then Buffalo Marsh Run runs east to west across the northern section of the Project Area, with the stream flowing to the west. The adjacent floodplains are low and wet, although there are elevated knolls noted at the margins of the upland and 52 lowlands. These profiles consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot- thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish-brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by Thunderbird recorded a Native American site on a similar landform just to the west of the Project Area. The slopes along the streams and the steep slopes were always forested according to the USGS maps. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. Plate 40. View of the Project Area, looking south. 53 Plate 41. View of the rocky outcrops within the western portion of the Project Area, looking north. Plate 42. View of rocky areas with the western Project Area, looking southwest. 54 Plate 43. View of Buffalo Marsh Run within the Project Area, looking west. Plate 44. View of previously-surveyed area within the Project Area, looking southeast. 55 Plate 45. View of the Project Area, looking northwest. Plate 46. View of the Project Area, looking south. 56 Plate 47. Detail view of the Project Area soils on the uplands. Plate 48. View of cultivated fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking south. 57 Plate 49. View of cultivated field and a fresh-water seep in the southeastern portion of the Project Area, looking south. The project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 25.90 acres were previously surveyed by GAI. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 144.1 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 15 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 240 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 68.3 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is 58 less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 17.1 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 277 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. In addition, the landform just to the south and north of the historic Miller house could contain some sites associated with the historic complex as could the landform to the west of the historic structure and around the associated cemetery. The 24.8 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would require approximately 397 shovel tests. Southern Tract Architectural Resources Three previously-identified architectural resources were located on the project tract and five previously-identified resources are located adjacent to the tract. Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Within the Project Area Site 034-0303 The Battle of Cedar Creek was fought on October 19, 1864 when the Union Army was engaged south of Middletown following their return from Harrisonburg and the burning of the Valley, when they were attacked before dawn by the Confederate Army of Jubal A. Early (Figure 18). Although outnumbered by more than two to one, the Confederates drove the Union Army to a point a mile north of Middletown. Here occurred a fateful pause. At 4 P.M. The Union Army counterattacked and with their vast superiority in numbers, completely routed the Southern Army driving them south beyond Strasburg. Early lost 59 some 2,900 men while Sheridan lost 5,665. This battle destroyed the Confederate presence in the Valley. To the end of the war, the Shenandoah Valley would be in Union hands. Figure 18. Battle of Cedar Creek map from the Civil War Preservation Trust. Note that the project area is to the northwest and off this map. The Battlefield Today To help put the current project area into perspective, Circa~ reviewed the current boundaries of the Cedar Creek Battlefield. This circa 1864 Civil War battlefield represents part of Sheridan’s Shenandoah Valley campaign. The CWSAC conducted a Phase I survey of the battlefield in 1993 but did not make any recommendations regarding the National 60 Register of Historic Places eligibility. VDHR determined the site potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in March 2009. In September 2009, the ABPP released their update to the CWSAC report on the nation’s Civil War battlefields. The 2009 update included a study area encompassing approximately 13,995.28 acres (Figure 19). Of that acreage, approximately 12,091.95 acres were recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (see yellow-outlined area on Figure 19). According to the 2009 update, approximately 1,455.12 acres within the battlefield are protected and approximately 410.38 acres are publicly accessible through the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation. The update also noted that Cedar Creek has a unique partnership arrangement. When Cedar Creek became a national park in 2002, its authorizing legislation specified key partners to the park including Belle Grove, Inc., the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation, and Shenandoah County Parks and Recreation. It went on to note that despite remarkable partnership efforts to protect this nationally-significant landscape, more than 10,000 acres remain at risk. Commercial, residential, and industrial development, including the expansion of a limestone quarry on the battlefield, the proposed widening of Interstate 81, and the proposed construction of a new 500kv transmission line, all illustrate the need for continued and strenuous protection of the Cedar Creek Battlefield. As noted on the map, the southern project area falls partially within the extreme northeastern portion of the study area partially within the area determined potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (see Figure 19). 61 Figure 19. 2009 Cedar Creek Battlefield American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) map. Plates 50 and 51 show the portion of the battlefield located within the project area. 62 Plate 50. View of Site 034-0303, looking north. Plate 51. View of Site 034-0303, looking south. 63 Site 034-0419 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Leslie Giles. She identified a circa 1800, one-story, log house, a stable, a smoke/meat house converted to a poultry house, a large bank barn, and an apple storage shed. Ms. Giles described the bank barn clad with vertical siding, gable roof with standing seam metal covering, and three Victorian cupolas. Although she indicated that the structure was a typical evolution of a log building with frame and masonry additions over course of approximately 150 years and a beautiful barn exists in excellent condition, she made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The log structure was later demolished. In 1994, VDHR indicated that the complex was not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the barn, a pole barn, shed, and well. The main house has been demolished and a modern modular home has been erected in its place. Plates 52 through 61 shows the current conditions of the structures at the site. Barn The barn is a circa 1800, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame bank barn clad in vertical wood siding and resting on a rusticated stone foundation. The roof is covered in standing seam metal with three cupolas. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is a double-leaf, sliding, vertical wood plan k door. Pole Barn The pole barn is now being used as an apple storage shed. This circa 1800 building is a one-story, seven-bay, side-gable, wood-frame pole barn resting on the ground. The roof is covered in standing seam metal supported by wood posts. The pole barn is open on all sides. There is a one-story, one-bay, shed roof, wood-frame lean-to attached to the side (west) elevation. The lean-to is open on three sides. Shed The shed is a circa 1800, one-story, one-bay, front-gable, wood-frame shed clad in vertical wood siding. Vines have started growing on the building and almost completely cover the façade making it difficult to discern any specific construction details. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is not visible. There is a one-story, one-bay, shed roof lean-to attached to the side (east) elevation. Well The well is a circa 1900, round, poured-concrete well resting slightly above grade and covered with overgrown vegetation. 64 Plate 52. View of house with Site 034-0491, looking north. Plate 53. View of the barn complex within Site 034-0491, looking north. 65 Plate 54. View of barn with Site 034-0491, looking east. Plate 55. View of barn within Site 034-0491, looking east. 66 Plate 56. View of barn within Site 034-0491, looking northwest. Plate 57. View of apple storage shed within Site 034-091, looking northwest. 67 Plate 58. View of apple barn within Site 034-0491, looking north. Plate 59. View of apple barn within Site 034-0491, looking south. 68 Plate 60. View of shed within Site 034-0491, looking south. Plate 61. View of well within Site 034-0491, looking south. 69 Site 034-5075 In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the TrAIL Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. This circa 1880, frame, vernacular dwelling with a two-story rear ell stands on a continuous-stone foundation and is covered with aluminum siding. The house is topped with a side gable roof that is clad in standing- seam metal. The fenestration consists of 2/2, double-hung, wood, sash windows, and the first-floor windows on the facade feature decorative shutters. A modern shed roof porch has been attached to the facade. The porch is built on a pier foundation and features turned- wood posts and a wood balustrade. A one-story, shed roof addition has been appended to the east elevation upon which another one-story, gable roofed addition was attached. Secondary resources included a barn, shed, and an equipment shed. The heavy-timber frame barn is clad in vertical-wood siding and has a gable roof covered with V-crimp metal and features a fore bay on the east elevation. GAI noted a wood framed shed adjacent to the main dwelling. This shed is clad in vertical-wood siding and topped with a standing- seam metal gable front roof. The window apertures remain open. GAI noted that the 1- story vehicle/equipment shed was clad with metal siding and a gable roof, with an attached open shed roof bay to the north elevation. GAI recommended that this resource was not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places; however, VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after gaining property access, GAI noted that main house was the same. They further noted that the was constructed on a continuous-stone foundation. Board and batten siding had been applied to the exterior walls, and the side gable roof is clad in standing- seam metal. An earth bank leads to large sliding wood doors on the northwest elevation. Their site visit confirmed that the 1-story wood framed shed was clad in both vertical-wood and board-and-batten siding. The standing-seam metal clad gable front roof is trimmed with exposed rafter tails. The fenestration consisted of 1/1, double-hung, vinyl, sash windows. Their site visit confirmed that the one-story vehicle/equipment shed is clad with three V-crimp metal siding, and the side gable roof is covered with standing-seam metal. A total of eight open bays are located on the facade, including the shed roofed addition on the northeast elevation. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appears potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C, with the barn as the primary resource. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Circa~ identified the house, barn, and shed. Plates 62 through 68 show the current condition of the structures. The house is almost completely covered in vegetation making it almost impossible to discern any specific construction details. 70 Barn The barn is a circa 1880, one-story, two-bay, side-gable, wood-frame barn clad in vertical wood siding. The foundation is not visible. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the façade. The entrance on the façade is a double-leaf, sliding, vertical wood plank door. Shed The shed is a circa 1880, one-story, five-bay, side-gable, wood-frame shed clad in vertical wood siding and resting on the ground. The roof is covered in standing seam metal. No windows are visible on the shed. The façade is open. Plate 62. View of main house at Site 034-5075, looking southwest. 71 Plate 63. View of main house at Site 034-5075, looking west. Plate 64. View of barn and shed at Site 034-5075, looking west. 72 Plate 65. View of bank barn at Site 034-5075, looking east. Plate 66. View of bank barn at Site 034-5075, looking northeast. 73 Plate 67. View of shed at Site 034-5075, looking south. Plate 68. View of shed at Site 034-5075, looking north. 74 Previously-Identified Architectural Resources Adjacent to the Project Area Site 034-0138 The site has a long history of survey by various architectural consultants. In 1966, the State Review Board, in 1973 Michael Quinn, in 1989 Maral Kalbian, in 1996 The Keeping Company, and in 2008 Louis Berger and Associates all reviewed the structure. Vaucluse is a 2-story, three-bay building on a raised-stone basement. It is constructed with Flemish- bond bring on the front and a five-course American-bond brick on the sides and back. It has two large interior brick chimneys. There are flat arches over all the openings. The building has louvered shutters, most of which have been used to board it up. The first-floor windows are full length and have jib doors which are paneled. The roof is hipped with a strong overhang. The eaves now have exposed rafters but appear to have originally been concealed. There are vent windows with original wooden bars in the raised basement. To the rear of the house there is a 1-and-a-1/2-story brick wing. This appears to have originally been the summer kitchen. It also appears that there was originally an open breezeway between the main house and the kitchen which has been enclosed with brick. The 1996 Preliminary Information Form (PIF) contained the following history of the site: The original owners of the property were Lord Fairfax and Yost Hite. Between 1765 and 1778, it was part of a 775-acre tract owned by Lewis Stephens, founder of the present-day Stephens City. Between 1778 and 1782, it was owned by Isaac Zane, revolutionary was patriot and owner of the Marlboro Iron Works. Between 1782 and 1785, the property was owned by Gabriel Jones, the "Vatley Lawyer," one of the first "King's Attorneys" for Frederick County. According to Garland Quarles in his book “Some Old Homes in Frederick County, Virginia”, Jones was "one of the best-known and most influential citizens of the Valley of Virginia during the Colonial period of its history." Jones served in the House of Burgesses for several years and was a friend and political campaigner for George Washington. He served in the Virginia General Assembly, the Continental Congress and the Virginia Constitutional Convention. Jones apparently never had a home at Vauscluse but is thought to have had a law office there, possibly in the building of which nothing remains today but a stone fireplace chimney. Jones sold the 775 acres to his son Strother in 1785. Strother had been a captain in the revolutionary army. He built his home and named it after a spring in Vaucluse France which was the country retreat of Petrarch, a 14th Century poet of courtly love. Strother lived at Vaucluse until his death. In 75 1790 and was the first person to be buried in the Jones family cemetery at Vaucluse. The earliest description of Vaucluse that we have is the diary of Rev. Frederick Goodwin, who came to Vaucluse in 1827 as a tutor to the Jones children (the grandchildren of Strother Jones). At that time there was no door on the south side of the house. The entrance was on the north side where a portico was "supported by large round pillars, made rough and white thus presenting the appearance like coarse sand stone." Rev. Goodwin's description of the house, other than the main entrance being on the north rather than the south, seems clearly to fit Vaucluse as it stands today. Descendants of Gabriel and Strother lived at Vaucluse until shortly after the Civil War. The story of the Civil War in the Northern Shenandoah Valley is recounted in the words of the Jones family and their relatives, the Bartons, in “Defend the Valley” by Margaretta Barton Colt. Vaucluse was occupied from time to time during the war by Union troops and ultimately all of the livelitock and crops were destroyed. “Gabriel Jones (1724-1806) and Some of His Descendants”, by Brown, Chappel and Myers contains a facsimile of a sales brochure for Vaucluse thought to date to the 1870's. At that time the "outbuildings for servants, &c., are also built or brick, and are ample in character." These included two tenant houses equal to ordinary farmhouses, stables, blacksmith's and carpenter's shops, a very large and comparatively new barn, and a grist mill "of capacity sufficient for the farm and neighborhood." From 1898 until 1963, the property was owned by the Rice Family of Winchester, first by John Rice and later by his son Warren. In 1963, the survivors of Warren Rice sold the property to John and Betty Chumley. The Chumleys added the building on the site of the former mill as well as all of the buildings listed above that are not associated with the Vaucluse manor house. Mr. Chum1ey passed away in 1984 and his widow sold 128 acres of the 234-acre parcel to the current owners in 1995. Since October 1995, the Chumley- era buildings have been used as a country inn/bed & breakfast.” In 2008, GAI resurveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted that the house underwent a major rehabilitation in circa 1995. The house rises two stories above a 76 uncoursed fieldstone foundation. It is constructed of Flemish-bond brick on the south façade and five-course America-bond brick on the remaining elevations. The house is capped with a hipped roof of standing-seam metal with overhanging eaves. It has two interior brick chimneys with corbelled caps. Windows are 12/12 double-hung wood-sash with wood-paneled spandrels on first story of the side elevations (replacing what was jib doors) and 12/12 triple-hung wood-sash windows on the first story of the symmetrically- fenestrated three-bay façade. The second story has 12/8 double-hung wood-sash windows. The centered single-leaf door on the façade features an eight-light transom. All window and door openings have jack-arched brick lintels. A five-bay, 1-story porch has been added to the house since the last survey and has an uncoursed-fieldstone foundation and wood posts and a simple wood balustrade. A 1 1/2-story brick wing is located west of the house and is attached to the main block along its northeast corner. A 1-story wood-frame entrance vestibule and porch are attached to the south elevation of the addition and the east elevation of the main block. The previous surveys and GAI noted several outbuildings on the property, a Gallery, a stone chimney stack, the mill house, the Chumley Homeplace, the Cottage on the Hill, the Cabin by the Pond, a swimming pool, and two sheds. The Gallery building was most likely moved or built on the site circa 1963 by Chumley, who used the building as his first studio. The building appears to incorporate a 1 1/2-story house and a 1-story barn. The barn is connected to the west elevation of the house. Both buildings are clad in weatherboard and have side gable, wood-shingle roofs. The house has a steeply-pitched roof with overhanging, spayed eaves that incorporated a full-width front porch. An exterior-end brick chimney is located on the east elevation. The house has 6/6 wood-sash windows and gabled dormers that hold 4/4 wood-sash windows. The south elevation of the house has an off-set single-leaf door. The barn has a triangular hay hood on its west elevation. The south elevation features a multi-light bay window. To the west of the house are the ruins of an outbuilding. All that remains is a large stone chimney with an interior fireplace. This appears to date earlier than the main house. The “Mill House Studio” is sited on Vaucluse Spring. According to current owners, the building was rebuilt on the foundation of the historic Vaucluse Mill house and used as Chumley’s second art studio. The building has a raised, uncoursed stone foundation. The two-story building is clad in weatherboard and has a gable roof of standing-seam metal with and ogee cornice and cornice returns. An interior brick chimney with a corbelled cap rises above the roof. Windows are 6/6 double-hung wood-sash. The Chumley Homeplace was built circa 1820 and was also moved to its current site in 1963 by John Chumley. It is a two-story building that has been clad in weatherboard siding and topped with a side gable roof. Wood shingles comprise the roofing material, and a stone chimney marks the gable end. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double- hung wood sash windows. A 1-story screened-in porch with a shed roof has been attached to the east elevation. Multiple 1-story additions have been appended to the house on the north, south, and east elevations. Built circa 2007, the “Cottage on the Hill” is a one-story wood-frame building set on a solid foundation clad in an uncoursed, rubble-stone veneer. The building is clad in weatherboard and is capped with a side gable standing-seam metal roof with a louvered ridge ventilator. A 1-story bay projects from the south elevation. Windows are 6/6 wood-sash. The façade has two single-leaf doors. Constructed circa 1850, the one story “Cabin by the Pond” was a former tobacco barn, according to the current 77 owners and was moved to the site. It sits on an uncoursed-stone foundation and is constructed of hewn logs. It has a side gable, standing-seam metal roof. A 1-story, wood- frame bay projects from the west elevation and is clad in weatherboard. Windows are 6/6 wood-sash. A 1-story shed porch fronts the building and shelters a single leaf door. The porch has wood posts. A circa 1990 swimming pool. The circa 1990 shed is located north of the mill. It is a one-story, wood-frame building with a concrete-block foundation. The walls are covered in what appears to be composition siding. It has a gambrel, asphalt shingle roof. A shed overhang is located on its east elevation. A circa 1990 1-story wood- frame shed is located adjacent to the pool, along its west side. It sits on a rubble-stone foundation and its exterior walls are clad in what appears to be composition siding. It has a pyramidal roof of wood shingles. GAI indicated that this property historically served as the site of a mill. However, it currently functions as a bed and breakfast. Since the property has lost the integrity of its original function, and since no evidence could be located that supports historic significance, they recommended this resource ineligible for listing under Criterion A. Although the artist John Chumley resided on this property and used it as his studio, it is not the most significant resource associated with his life. As such, the Inn at Vaucluse Spring is not recommended eligible for National Register Historic Places listing under Criterion B. The VDHR concluded that this resource is eligible for NRHP listing under Criterion C in 1996. The buildings associated with this property have not lost integrity and continue to convey their architectural significance. In addition, although some of the buildings on the property have been moved from their original locations, under Criteria Consideration B, as long as these buildings are significant solely for their architectural value, they can still be considered eligible for listing on the NRHP. As such, The Inn at Vaucluse Spring is still recommended eligible for listing under Criterion C. VDHR concurred that the recommendations for listing appears to be still valid in 2009 based on data provided for this project. VDHR suggested that current Phase II data would be needed to confirm and determine whether other National Register of Historic Places criteria apply, due to the passage of time. No additional determination of eligibility made by VDHR staff in 2009. The site form currently lists the site as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 69 through 81 show the current conditions of the structures at the site. 78 Plate 69. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking southwest. Plate 70. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. 79 Plate 71. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. Plate 72. View of house at Site 034-0138, looking west. 80 Plate 73. View of chimney at Site 034-0138, looking west. Plate 74. View of secondary house at Site 034-0138, looking north. 81 Plate 75. View of Site 034-0138, looking north. Plate 76. View of mill at Site 034-0138, looking north. 82 Plate 77. View of shed by mill at Site 034-0138, looking east. Plate 78. View of house and swimming pool at Site 034-0138, looking north. 83 Plate 79. View of gallery at Site 034-0138, looking north. Plate 80. View of gallery at Site 034-0138, looking northwest. 84 Plate 81. View of outbuilding at gallery at Site 034-0138, looking north. Site 034-0238 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1875 1-story, wood-frame church and a concrete-block shed. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not evaluated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 82 through 87 show the current conditions of the structure. 85 Plate 82. View of Site 034-0238, looking northeast. Plate 83. View of Site 034-0238, looking north. 86 Plate 84. View of Site 034-0238, looking north. 87 Plate 85. View of Site 034-0238, looking south. Plate 86. View of Site 034-0238, looking southeast. 88 Plate 87. View of shed Site 034-0238, looking northeast. Site 034-0239 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1870 2-story main house, a remolded smokehouse, a frame barn, and a two-bay, concrete-block garage. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The site form currently lists the site as not evaluated for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 88 through 94 show the current conditions of the project area. 89 Plate 88. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking northwest. Plate 89. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking north. 90 Plate 90. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking northeast. Plate 91. View of house at Site 034-0239, looking west. 91 Plate 92. View of garage and barn at Site 034-0239, looking north. Plate 93. View of barn at Site 034-0239, looking west. 92 Plate 94. View of from the edge of Site 034-0239 looking east towards the Site 034-0138. Site 034-0263 In 1989, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1880 3-bay main house, a circa 1940 timber-frame board-and-batten shed with a gable roof, a 1930 two-bay timber-frame garage with a gable roof, and a modern garage. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the 2-story house has a side gable roof, is situated on a continuous-stone foundation with vinyl siding. The roofing material consists of standing-seam metal, and a central chimney pierces the roof at the ridgeline. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double-hung vinyl sash windows with fixed shutters. The 1-story, three-bay open porch stands on a pier foundation with lattice skirting with turned wood posts and a wood balustrade. A 2-story ell projects from the rear of the building. GAI noted a 1-story, wood framed shed stands just north of the house. It stands on a concrete block pier foundation, is clad in vertical-wood siding, and is topped with a shed roof. The roof is covered with standing-seam metal and trimmed with exposed rafter tails. Two garages stand slightly southwest of the main dwelling. A two-bay modern garage is clad in vertical-wood siding and features two rolling vehicle doors. It is topped with a gable front roof covered with standing-seam metal. Adjacent to this garage is a one-bay wood framed garage. This garage has vertical-wood siding, a gable roof, and a set of large hinged double doors. 93 GAI recommended that the house lacks historical significance and they could not locate any information to associate the dwelling with significant historic events at the local, state, or national levels. Therefore, they recommended the dwelling is not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A. To date, no connection between the house and the life or activities of a person important in local, national, or regional history could be identified. As such, it is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion B. The dwelling does not possess significant architectural features and does not represent the work of a master. Therefore, this resource is recommended ineligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion C. In 2009, VDHR concurred with their recommendation. The site form currently lists the site as not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 95 through 99 show the current condition of the structures. Plate 95. View of Site 034-0263, looking southwest. 94 Plate 96. View of outbuildings at Site 034-0263, looking southwest. Plate 97. View of shed at Site 034-0263, looking west. 95 Plate 98. View of garage and shed at Site 034-0263, looking southwest. Plate 99. View of garage and shed at Site 034-0263, looking west. 96 Site 034-0264 In 1991, the house was surveyed by Maral Kalbian. She identified a circa 1870 3-bay main house, a circa 1940 timber-frame, vertical-board siding, gable roof garage, a circa 1900 timber-frame, shed roof, vertical-board siding privy, a 1930 shed, a 1920 small, timber frame, vertical matchboard siding, gable roof shed, a 1910 timber-frame, vertical-board siding, gable standing-seam metal roof, square cupola with pyramidal roof cape barn, and a circa 1940 timber-frame, long and low, shed roof chicken house. She made no recommendations as to the site’s eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, GAI surveyed the site during a Phase I survey for the Virginia State Line- Meadowbrook Substation-Appalachian Trail segments of the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project in Frederick and Warren counties. At that time, they noted restricted access to the property and their survey was completed from the public-access road. GAI noted that the circa 1870 2-story frame vernacular dwelling was built on a continuous-stone foundation. The exterior walls are weatherboard and trimmed with corner boards and a standing-seam metal covers the side gable roof. The fenestration throughout consists of 2/2 double-hung, wood sash windows with wood window surrounds. A one-story, three-bay open porch s located on the facade. The porch is constructed on a brick-pier foundation and features Tuscan columns with a wood balustrade. The one-story, gable roofed garage is clad in vertical-wood siding and is covered with a standing-seam metal roof trimmed with exposed rafter tails. A large vehicle entrance marks the southeast elevation, but the door had been removed. GAI noted that the garage was used for storage and had begun to deteriorate. GAI noted that the privy was not observed from the public right-of-way. GAI noted that adjacent to the barn is the one-story wood framed shed that is clad in weatherboard siding. It has a gable roof with standing-seam metal and a shed roof addition on the west elevation. GAI noted that the shed was in poor condition. The tool shed is a wood-framed building that has vertical-wood siding and a gable front roof covered with rolled asphalt. A hinged wooden door provides access on the facade, and the fenestration consists of six-light fixed sash windows. GAI noted no changes appeared to have occurred since the previous survey was conducted on the barn. GAI noted that the chicken coop is set back on the property and is difficult to view from the public right-of-way. It appeared to be clad in vertical-board siding with 6/6 double-hung wood sash windows. GAI recommended that this resource did not clearly reflect the nature and extent of agricultural practices of Frederick County in the late 19th or early 20th centuries. They suggested that numerous other area farms retain more and better representative examples of agricultural outbuildings from the time period. Therefore, the Shiley Farm is recommended not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A. GAI could not connect this property to any significant individuals in local or state history. As such, this resource was recommended ineligible for listing for the National Register of Historic Places listing under Criterion B. The main house stands as a typical example of a commonly-found architectural form in the region. The domestic and agricultural outbuildings do not possess the requisite architectural significance for listing and were not constructed using any specialized techniques. Therefore, GAI recommended the Shiley Farm not eligible for listing for the National Register of Historic Places listing 97 under Criterion C. VDHR asked GAI to conduct a complete Phase I survey to fully access and survey the property. In 2009, after gaining property access, GAI noted that the weatherboard siding was removed but had not yet been replaced on the main house. In addition, many of the 2/2 double-hung wood sash windows have been replaced with 1/1 double-hung vinyl sash windows. GAI also noted that there are two interior brick chimneys with corbelled caps, as well as cornice returns on the eaves. GAI confirmed that the privy is no longer extant. GAI indicated that although no changes have occurred to this shed since the previous survey. However, it should be noted that the windows have all been boarded over except for the fixed sash window in the gable end. Also, the shed roof addition is clad in vertical wood siding and features a sliding wood vehicle door. GAI noted no changes to the tool shed have occurred since the previous survey. GAI noted that the 2-story barn is constructed on a parged foundation. The exterior walls are clad with vertical-wood siding and standing- seam metal covers the side gable roof. A cupola with louvered vents and a pyramidal roof is centrally located at the roof ridgeline. An overhanging forebay marks the facade and shelters four open bays. GAI noted that the poultry house is situated west of the main dwelling. It is a 1-story, wood-framed building constructed on a poured-concrete foundation. Vertical-wood siding covers the exterior walls. A shed roof tops the poultry house and is clad in standing- seam metal. The fenestration consists of 6/6 double-hung wood sash windows. However, many of the windows no longer have glass panes, but are instead covered with chicken wire. A shed roof addition on the southwest elevation has collapsed. After a site visit with full property access, GAI maintained their original recommendation that the site was not potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A, B, and C. However, in 2009, VDHR believed that the resource appeared potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmark Register under Criteria A and C. The site form currently lists the site as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Plates 100 through 103 show the current condition of the structures. 98 Plate 100. View of house at Site 034-0264, looking west. Plate 101. View of house at Site 034-0264, looking west. 99 Plate 102. View of barn at Site 034-0264, looking west. Plate 103. View of garage at Site 034-0264, looking west. 100 Probability Model All open, exposed areas were inspected for the presence of artifacts and signs of cultural features. In addition, 22 judgmental shovel tests were excavated to sample the stratigraphy of the landforms. Two soil layers were noted on several of the aprons and within the more defined floodplains along Buffalo Marsh Run. A discussion with the landowner indicated that he was unaware of any cultural resources on his property. The Project Area consists of a series of upland ridges separated by drainages and swales (Plates 104 through ). The slopes are moderate to steep with large swales noted between the level uplands. The project area was historically used as an apple orchard that has now been converted to cropland or, where rock outcroppings are present, pasture or forested lands on the steep slopes. The trees were planted roughly eight feet apart in rows roughly eight feet apart. The trees were eventually cut, and the stumps were removed via a backhoe sometime after1997. This clearing activity created disturbance to the soil in the fields in this area. Crops are now planted in the converted apple orchards in the southern, western, and eastern sections of the project area. Mature apple orchards are planted along the western boundary and the north western boundaries of the project area. The remaining acreage is used as pasture for livestock. The northern section of the Project Area consists of an upland ridge with stone outcroppings. Shovel tests revealed one soil stratum under a thin root mat on the uplands. On some of the upland tops and side slopes where the rock outcrops were noted, Stratum A consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy clay under a thin root mat, 0.20 to 0. 34 feet thick, overlying a reddish-brown clay subsoil. Numerous natural stones were noted within the Stratum A fill. Meadow Brooks is situated to the east of the Project Area with a tributary draining the upper northern area and a tributary draining the southern project area. The northern tributary has been dammed for a pond. The adjacent floodplains are low and wet, although there are elevated knolls noted at the margins of the upland and lowlands. These profiles consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot-thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish- brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by GAI did not record any archaeological resources within the project tract. The slopes along steep slopes in the northwestern section of the project area were always forested according to the USGS maps. This area had been recently clear cut of the timber. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. The 294.3-acre project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 20.90 acres are located within the previous surveyed areas and will not be re-surveyed. Approximately 101 129.8 acres were originally part of an apple orchard. The trees were cut down and the stumps removed by heavy equipment, then the area smoothed and cultivated in crops. The previous development at the site would preclude any intact archaeological resources in these areas. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 57.2 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 5.7 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 91.2 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 75.5 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams and on the uplands. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 18.8 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 300 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. The 10.9 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would 102 require approximately 162 shovel tests. In addition, metal detecting will be completed on the portion of the project area within the battlefield boundaries. An architectural survey is recommended on all structures 45-years old or older within a half-mile buffer of the Project Areas. A drive through of this area indicates several 18th and 19th century structures and early-to mid-20th century structures within the half-mile buffer. Plate 104. View of converted agricultural fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking north. 103 Plate 105. View of converted fields within the southern portion of the Project Area, looking northwest. Plate 106. View of converted fields within the central section of the Project Area, looking northwest. 104 Plate 107. View of converted fields in the central section of the Project Area, looking west. Plate 108. View of the converted fields and the exisiting apple orchard in the western section of the Project Area, looking west. 105 Plate 109. View of the apple orchard in the western portion of the Project Area, looking south. Plate 110. View of a fresh-water seep, looking north. 106 Plate 111. View of a pond within the Project Area, looking north. Plate 112. View of the fields within the Project Area, looking west. 107 Plate 113. View of rock outcrops within the field of the Project Area, looking northeast. Plate 114. View of the Project Area, looking north. 108 Plate 115. View of rock outcrops within the Project Area, looking north. Plate 116. View of the fields within the Project Area, looking northeast. 109 Plate 117. View of the northwestern apple orchard with the Project Area, looking north. Plate 118. View of the fields and ponds within the Project Area, looking southwest. 110 Plate 119. View of floodplain along the northern tributary to Meadow Brook within the Project Area, looking east. Plate 120. View of the flood plain at the northern tributary to Meadow Brook within the Project Area, looking south. 111 Plate 121. View of the Project Area, looking east. Plate 122. View of recently timbered area near the northwestern corner of the Project Area, looking south. 112 consisted of a dark reddish-brown loamy silt, 0.48 to 0.61-foot-thick Stratum A, overlying a brownish red silty clay, 0.34 to 0.41-foot-thick Stratum B. Subsoil consisted of a reddish- brown clay. The Phase I survey completed by GAI did not record any archaeological resources within the project tract. The slopes along steep slopes in the northwestern section of the project area were always forested according to the USGS maps. This area had been recently clear cut of the timber. There is one pond and several fresh-water seeps on the property to provide water for the cattle. There are several dirt roads that provide access into the interior section of the project tract. The 294.3-acre project tract contains areas of low, moderate, and high archaeological site probability. According to Circa~’s assessment, areas classified as low-potential are areas of moderate to steep slopes, wetlands, disturbed areas, and poor soil; moderate-potential areas are level landforms that contain somewhat well-drained soils; and high-potential areas are well-drained soils located proximal to water, a source of raw material for tool making, or a source of food, or close to a known historic site. Approximately 20.90 acres are located within the previous surveyed areas and will not be re-surveyed. Approximately 129.8 acres were originally part of an apple orchard. The trees were cut down and the stumps removed by heavy equipment, then the area smoothed and cultivated in crops. The previous development at the site would preclude any intact archaeological resources in these areas. Areas of low archaeological potential within the Project Area generally include the stream corridors, steep slopes, wetlands, areas of rock outcrops, the ponded areas, and the lowlands that surround them, gravel roads, and the utility power lines. The 57.2 acres of low-potential areas are found in the settings where independent variables suggest that archaeological sites are unlikely. The low-probability areas will be walked at 50-foot intervals and shovel tested at 10% or greater. Approximately 5.7 acres are 10% of the low- probability areas and would require roughly 91.2 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. Moderate potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are moderately likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar landscapes within Frederick County as the Project Area have contained some landforms with level, moderately-drained, moderately- productive soils, and a moderate proximity to surface water sources that contained sites. The 75.5 acres of moderate potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained; and distance to water is greater than 400 feet and no further than 1,000 feet. Within the Project Area, these potential areas consist of broad gentle slopes and uplands that are roughly 500 feet from a water source. In addition, in some areas, these are located on steeper slopes closer to a water source. These areas will be walked and judgmentally shovel tested up to 25% or greater of the area. The areas tested will be located throughout the acreage and will consist of the slightly-elevated landforms above the streams and on the uplands. Shovel test intervals will be at 50- and 25-foot intervals. Approximately 18.8 acres are 25% of the moderate-probability areas and would require roughly 300 shovel tests to sample those areas according to the model. 113 High potential areas are defined as those which, based on landform and location, are very likely to contain at least some type of archaeological remains, either Native American, historic, or both. Similar settings within Frederick County as the Project Area contain some landforms with level, well-drained, productive soils, proximity to surface water sources, these are additionally viewed as having high potential for historic and Native American settlement. There were several fresh-water seeps within the project area, and although they are currently used to water the cattle, and are very muddy, these would have been excellent sources of fresh water during the Native American and historic periods. The areas around the seeps are considered high-potential areas. The 10.9 acres of high potential are those that combine the following: relief is less than a 15% slope, soils are well-drained or moderately-well-drained, the nearest distance to water is 400 feet or less, and areas near known historic sites. Within the development area, the high-potential areas are noted on the center and edges of the uplands and near the drainages and the fresh-water seeps. Survey will cover 100% of these areas and will be at 50- or 25-foot intervals and would require approximately 162 shovel tests. In addition, metal detecting will be completed on the portion of the project area within the battlefield boundaries. An architectural survey is recommended on all structures 45-years old or older within a half-mile buffer of the Project Areas. A drive through of this area indicates several 18th and 19th century structures and early-to mid-20th century structures within the half-mile buffer. . 114 Attachments: Photo, Shovel Test, and Probability Maps