Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.18 Cultural StudyGrass Mesa Telecommunication Tower July, 2017 Garfield County Limited Impact Review Cultural Study OAHP Use Only: OAHP Doc. No._______________________ OAHP Project No._____________ Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation LIMITED-RESULTS CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY FORM (Page 1 of 4) Small scale limited results projects include block surveys under 160 acres with linear surveys under four miles. Additionally, there should be no sites and a maximum of four Isolated Finds. This form must be typed. I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Report Title (include County): Class III Cultural Resource Inventory of Mountain Radio Systems Grass Mesa Telecommunications Tower Project, Garfield County, Colorado 2. Date of Field Work: 06/01/2017 3. Form completed by: Abbie L. Harrison Date: 06/06/2017 4. Survey Organization/Agency: Alpine Archaeological Consultants, Inc. Principal Investigator: Jaclyn Mullen Principal Investigator's Signature: Other Crew: Address: 900 S Townsend/P.O. Box 2075 Montrose, CO 81402 5. Lead Agency / Land Owner: Federal Communications Commission/private landowner Contact: N/A Address: N/A 6. Client: HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. on behalf of Mountain Radio Systems 7. Permit Type and Number: State of Colorado Archaeological Permit (2017-1) 8. Report / Contract Number: N/A 9. Comments: N/A II. DESCRIPTION OF UNDERTAKING / PROJECT 10. Type of Undertaking: Mountain Radio Systems is proposing to construct a new communications tower. The proposed tower is 100 ft. tall and self-supporting. A 40-x-36-ft. area (compound) will be cleared and leveled, and will include the tower and an 8-x-20-foot building. To the north of the tower, a 56-foot-long and 10-foot- wide access road will provide access to the existing county road. 11. Size of Undertaking (acres): 10.73 Size of Project (if different): 12. Nature of the Anticipated Disturbance: The construction of the tower will impact the area. Disturbances include the displacement of soils by machinery. 13. Comments: Limited-Results Archaeological Survey Form (Page 2 of 4) III. PROJECT LOCATION Please attach a photocopy of USGS Quad. clearly showing the project location. The Quad. should be clearly labeled with the Prime Meridian, Township, Range, Section(s), Quad. map name, size, and date. Please do not reduce or enlarge the photocopy. 14. Description: The project area is located approximately 1.5 miles southeast of Rifle, Colorado. The project area is on private land at the northeast corner of Grass Mesa. 15. Legal Location: Quad. Map: Rifle, CO Date(s): 1982 Principal Meridian: 6th NM Ute NOTE: Only generalized subdivision ("quarter quarters") within each section is needed Township: 6S Range: 93W Sec.: 22 1/4s SE NE NE SE 6S 93W Sec.: 23 1/4s SW NW NW SW If section(s) is irregular, explain alignment method: 16. Total number of acres surveyed: 10.73 17. Comments: IV. ENVIRONMENT 18. General Topographic Setting: The project area is located on the top of Grass Mesa, in the northeast corner of the landmark. The elevation of the project area is approximately 6,175.95 ft. Current Land Use: Private livestock/ranching 19. Flora: Vegetation includes sagebrush, salsify, prickly pear cactus, scarlet globemallow, cheat grass and bunch grasses. 20. Soils/Geology: Soil consists of a red to brown silt. The project area is on a flat to gently rolling mesa top. 21. Ground Visibility: Between 80 and 100 percent. 22. Comments: V. LITERATURE REVIEW 23. Location of File Search: Based on the National Programmatic Agreement (NPA) for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (Nationwide PA [FCC 04-222]), both the direct and visual area of potential effect (APE) must be considered for a communications tower project. The direct APE is the location where ground disturbance is proposed. The APE for visual effects is defined based on the type and height of the tower and the surrounding topography. In order for a previously recorded site to require a visual assessment survey, the cultural resource must be officially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A, B, or C, and the site’s setting must be considered a character-defining feature that supports the site’s eligibility. Per the NPA, because the proposed addition to the existing communication tower will be less than 200-ft. in total height, the visual APE for this project is defined as a 0.5-mi. radius surrounding the existing tower location. Alpine conducted a file search of a 0.5-mile radius surrounding the existing tower location to determine whether any known cultural resources were within the direct or visual APE of the tower. Limited-Results Archaeological Survey Form (page 3 of 4) Date: 04/04/17 using History Colorado's Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's online Compass website. 24. Previous Survey Activity In the project area: The majority of the project area has not been previously inventoried; however, one oil and gas survey (GF.LM.R394) and one transmission line survey (MC.LM.R355) do overlap the northern edge of the current project area. In the general region: One oil and gas survey (GF.LM.R583). III. LITERATURE REVIEW (continued) 25. Known Cultural Resources In the project area: The majority of the project area has not been previously inventoried for cultural resources. No cultural resources have been found within the project area. In the general region (summarize): Within the 0.5-mi. visual APE, there are two previously recorded archaeological sites and six isolated finds. The cultural resource sites include one not eligible multicomponent site and one not eligible prehistoric site. All six of the isolated finds are considered not eligible. No other sites are within the direct or visual APE. 26. Expected Results: Prehistoric isolated finds and possible prehistoric lithic scatters were expected. Historic sites and isolated finds were also expected and limited to isolated artifacts. VI. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 27. Objectives: The objective of the cultural resource survey was to identify and assess the cultural resources in the project area and to evaluate their significance under applicable federal cultural resource laws. This process is intended to aid in the preservation of significant cultural resources, either by providing boundaries that can be avoided or by facilitating a thorough understanding of a site’s components in advance of the creation of adequate mitigative strategies. This objective was accomplished, first, by conducting a site file search and, second, by conducting an intensive pedestrian survey of the project area. VII. FIELD METHODS 28. Definitions: Site: The location of a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing or ruined, that is more than an IF. IF: Any non-structural remains of a single event; alternately, any non-structural assemblage of approximately 10 or fewer artifacts within an area of approximately 10 square meters or less. 29. Describe Survey Method: The project area was surveyed by one archaeologist walking parallel transects spaced no more than 15 meters apart across the inventory block. No artifacts or features were identified during the inventory. Limited-Results Archaeological Survey Form (page 4 of 4) VIII. RESULTS 30. List Ifs, if applicable. Indicate IF locations on the map completed for Part III. A. Smithsonian Number: Description: B. Smithsonian Number: Description: C. Smithsonian Number: Description: D. Smithsonian Number: Description: E. Smithsonian Number: Description: 31. Using your professional knowledge of the region, why are there none or very limited cultural remains in the project area? Is there subsurface potential? The project area contains no cultural resources due to the small size of the project, previous disturbances from construction, and the modern use of the landscape by the private landowner. The project area has no subsurface potential given the shallow soil deposition. Figure 1. Overview of project area, facing east-northeast. Figure 2. Overview of project area, facing south-southwest. ATTACHMENT 1. CONSULTANT INFORMATION Provide a current copy of the resume or curriculum vitae for the Principal Investigator and any researcher or other person who contributed to, reviewed, or provided significant input into the research, analysis, writing or conclusions presented in this filing. Abbie Harrison, a SOI-qualified archaeologist, conducted the Class III inventory. Jaclyn Mullen served as Alpine’s Principal Investigator (PI) for the project. Both Abbie and Jaclyn’s resumes are attached. ATTACHMENT 2. SITE INFORMATION - PHOTOGRAPH REQUIREMENTS Except in cases where no Historic Properties were identified within the Areas of Potential Effects, submit photographs as described below. Photographs should be in color, marked so as to identify the project, keyed to the relevant map or text, and dated; the focal length of the lens and the height of the camera should be noted. The source of any photograph included but not taken by the Applicant or its consultant (including copies of historic images) should be identified on the photograph. Photographs taken from the site should show views from the proposed location in all directions. The direction (e.g., north, south, etc.) should be indicated on each photograph, and, as a group, the photographs should present a complete (360 degree) view of the area around the proposed site. Figure 1 includes four photographs taken from the cardinal directions facing outward from the proposed communications tower and four photographs taken facing the proposed tower. Photographs are plotted on the accompanying plan map of the tower site, showing the direction in which they were taken. Photographs of all listed in and eligible properties within the Areas of Potential Effects. No historic properties are present within the direct or visual APE. If any listed or eligible properties are visible from the proposed site, photographs looking at the site from each historic property. The approximate distance in feet (meters) between the site and the historic property should be included. If any listed or eligible properties are within the APE, photos looking at each historic property should be included. No known historic properties are present within the direct or visual APE. Figure 1. Plan map of the proposed telecommunications tower showing the location of the photograph points and their associated direction. Photo Point 1. Overview of project area from proposed tower location, facing south. Photo Point 2. Overview of proposed tower location, facing north. Photo Point 3. Overview of project area from proposed tower location, facing east. Photo Point 4. Overview of proposed tower location, facing west. Photo Point 5: Overview of project area from proposed tower location, facing north. Photo Point 6: Overview of proposed tower location, facing south. Photo Point 7: Overview of project area from proposed tower location, facing west. Photo Point 8: Overview of proposed tower location, facing east. ATTACHMENT 3. SITE INFORMATION - MAP REQUIREMENTS Include one or more 7.5-minute quad USGS topographical maps that: • Identify the Areas of Potential Effects for both Direct and Visual Effects. If a map is copied from the original, include a key with the name of quad and date. • Show the location of the proposed site and any access roads or other easements including excavations. • Show the locations of each property listed. • Include keys for any symbols, colors, or other identifiers. • Submit color maps whenever possible. Figure 2 displays the APE for both the direct and visual effects. No eligible historic properties are within the direct or visual APE. Figure 3 displays the plan layout of the proposed tower location. Figure 2. Visual and direct APE. Figure 3. Proposed configuration of the new tower and pad. ATTACHMENT 4. SITE INFORMATION – ADDITIONAL SITE INFORMATION Describe any additional structures, access roads, utility lines, fences, easements, or other construction planned for the site. Mountain Radio Systems is proposing to construct a new communications tower. The proposed tower is 100 ft. tall and self-supporting. A 40-x-36-ft. area (compound) will be cleared and leveled, and will include the tower and an 8-x-20-foot building. To the north of the tower, a 56-foot-long and 10-foot-wide access road will provide access to the existing county road. ATTACHMENT 5. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT a. Describe the APE for direct effects and explain how this APE was determined. The APE for direct effects is defined as the area of potential ground disturbance and any property, or any portion thereof that will be physically altered or destroyed by the undertaking. A 40-x-36-ft. area (compound) will be cleared and leveled, and will include the tower and an 8-x-20-foot building. To the north of the tower, a 56-foot-long and 10-foot-wide access road will provide access to the existing county road. b. Describe the APE for visual effects and explain how this APE was determined. The area of potential effects (APE) for visual effects is the geographic area in which the Project has the potential to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the setting is a character-defining feature of a historic property that makes it eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The presumed APE for visual effects for construction of new facilities is the area from which the tower will be visible. Due to the overall height of 100 feet (the top of the proposed tower), the APE for visual impacts was defined as the area within an approximately 0.5-mile radius of the proposed installation site. ATTACHMENT 6. HISTORIC PROPERTIES DIRECT EFFECTS a. List all properties within the APE for direct effects. The Class III inventory confirmed that there are no archaeological sites within the APE for Direct Effects. b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the APE for direct effects, not listed in part “a” (above), that the Applicant considers to be eligible for listing in the National Register as a result of the Applicant’s research. For each such property, describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63). For each property that was specifically considered and determined not to be eligible, describe why it does not satisfy the criteria of eligibility. No historic properties were identified within the direct effects APE. c. Describe the techniques and the methodology, including any field survey, used to identify Historic Properties within the APE for direct effects. If no archeological field survey was performed, provide a report substantiating that: i) the depth of previous disturbance exceeds the proposed construction depth (excluding footings and other anchoring mechanisms) by at least 2 feet; or, ii) geomorphological evidence indicates that cultural resource-bearing soils do not occur within the project area or may occur but at depths that exceed 2 feet below the proposed construction depth. A SOI-qualified archaeologist conducted a Class III inventory of the direct APE. The archaeologist walked parallel transects spaced at 15-meter-wide intervals to cover the entire parcel. No cultural resource sites were found during the inventory. ATTACHMENT 7. HISTORIC PROPERTIES VISUAL EFFECTS. a. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the APE for visual effects that is listed in the National Register, has been formally determined eligible for listing by the Keeper of the National Register, or is identified as considered eligible for listing in the records of the SHPO/THPO, pursuant to Section VI.D.I.a. of the Nationwide Agreement. No historic properties are within the 0.5-mile radius APE for visual effects. b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each Historic Property in the APE for visual effects, not listed in part “a”, identified through the comments of Indian Tribes, NHOs, local governments, or members of the public. Identify each individual or group whose comments led to the inclusion of a Historic Property in this attachment. For each such property, describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63). As of the date of this report, no comments have been received from Indian Tribes, NHOs, local governments, or members of the public that identify Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects. c. For any properties listed in the above Historic Properties list, that the Applicant considers no longer eligible for inclusion in the National Register, explain the basis for this recommendation. No such properties exist.