Search

The City of Phoenix’s (COP) Downtown Development Office plans to construct facilities related to the Phoenix Bioscience Center on COP-owned land in downtown Phoenix. The COP cost center number for the project is ED10000012. Because project activities may cause adverse impacts to subsurface cultural resources - both prehistoric and historic - the COP Parks and Recreation Department Pueblo Grande Museum (PGM), which coordinates archaeological projects for all COP departments (Bostwick 2004) requested that EcoPlan Associates, Inc. (EcoPlan) implement an archaeological testing program to inform the treatment of cultural resources in the project area. This COP-funded testing program is being conducted by EcoPlan under on-call contract number 117951 between the COP Parks and Recreation Department and EcoPlan. This testing program is intended to comply with the terms of the Arizona Antiquities Act (Arizona Revised Statutes [ARS] §41-841, el seq.), the Arizona Board of Regents Rules 8-201 through 8-207 as authorized by ARS §15-1631, and the COP Historic Preservation Ordinance. The testing area is located partially within the boundary of site AZ T: 12:70 (ASM) (hereafter, Pueblo Patricio); also, the testing area had been the location of several historic buildings, the surface components of which no longer exist. This preliminary report presents, in summary fashion, the results of archaeological testing within the project area.

In 2004, a planning level (Phase I) survey was completed at the Fort Dix Military Installation in Burlington and Ocean Counties, New Jersey. Since 1995, Fort Dix has undertaken a long-term investigation to identify, evaluate, prioritize, and manage archaeological resources at the installation. A stratified research methodology was initially employed by placing standardized sampling units into zones of high and low sensitivity. Areas of high and low archaeological sensitivity consisted of testable areas within and beyond 500 feet of stream margins and wetlands, respectively. Subsequently, sampling units were randomly placed within these two zones of archaeological sensitivity, consisting of 500 foot to a side block units (5.74 acres); one-foot-diameter shovel tests were then placed at a 50-foot-interval grid within each block unit. Each block unit consisted of 121 shovel tests. A total of 250 blocks, or approximately 30,250 shovel tests were excavated; the total placement of blocks equaled 1,435 acres, or about a 10% sample of testable area across the installation. The planning level survey resulted in the discovery of 88 new archaeological sites; also, 18 were revisited and evaluated from previous avocational investigations. In all, 106 archaeological loci have been documented at Fort Dix, consisting of 46 historic, 51 prehistoric, and 9 multicomponent (historic/prehistoric) site locations. Historic period sites consist of homesteads, taverns, hotels, saw and grist mills, bog iron furnaces, blacksmith/wheelwright shops, and schools, which date from the middle 18th to early 20th centuries; historic settlement patterns are oriented toward roads and streams. Prehistoric period sites consist of generalized camp sites (Bases) and specialized extractive stations (Targets) which span the entire prehistory of the region, dating from 11,500 to 350 years B.P. Prehistoric site distributions produce a dual, or two-level settlement system, where multiple activity base camps were situated on low divides, adjacent to large wetlands and streams, while more specialized loci tended to be found on upland divides and side slopes, further from water. Interestingly, over half of all prehistoric sites are positioned on southern exposures, possibly implying a fall/winter season(s) procurement pattern in this region. It is recommended that 69 sites be considered as potentially eligible or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D.

This investigation was performed for the Fort Dix Directorate of Public Works/Environmental Division and represents partial fulfillment of Fort Dix’s ongoing cultural resources obligations under Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as amended). The purpose of this fieldwork was to identify any potentially significant cultural resources that might be contained in Tactical Areas (TACs) 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1F, within the northwestern corner of the base, as well as to systematically test a series of 24 prehistoric and historical sites that had been previously recorded in those areas. Phase I archaeological testing of Tactical Areas 1A-C and F was completed and required the excavation of 3,692 shovel test pits which resulted in the recovery of 3,607 artifacts, including 1,479 Native American related artifacts and 1,914 artifacts associated with this area’s historic period inhabitants. Cultural deposits sampled via this investigation derived from a total of 35 separate archaeological sites. Included within this total were 24 known sites (16 prehistoric and 8 historic) that were specifically targeted for systematic testing. Subsurface examinations in other portions of the study area resulted in the discovery of another 11 previously undocumented Native American occupations. In addition,testing within these sites led to the identification of six formerly unknown prehistoric and one known but undocumented historic components. In terms of prehistoric deposits, the overall recovered artifact assemblage from this investigation represents 33 spatially distinct occupation loci and effectively more than doubled the number of identified Native American sites within this portion of the Fort.