The URL can be used to link to this page

BYPASS ROAD PROJECT CORRESPONDENCE Bypass Road Project Correspondence r. Wlt! Y s t-VTS01 * , o AMY 2 �MISSNO �eQ O "lOnWealth November 13, 1989 t Annie C. Harris Chairman Salem Historical Commission One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and By-Pass Dear Ms. Harris: Thank you for your letter of October 24, 1989 requesting that the Salem Historical Commission be included as an interested party in the "Section 106 " consultation for the proposed project referenced above. The Massachusetts Historical Commission welcomes your continued input and participation in the consultation process, and looks forward to meeting with you again. Sincerely, Valerie A. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation officer_ Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: James Walsh, FHWA Ellen DiGeronimo, MDPW Frank Bracaglia, MDPW Don Klima, ACHP VAT/kp Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A. Talmage,Executive Director, State Historic Preservation Offecer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael. Connolly,Secretary f i 'n ,J TS *FIs V � p ( N * O �c 4MISSVO ��eQ �m"&onWealth to June 12 , 1989 JU1� 2 r) Daniel Pierce fi�1 Salem Historical Commission One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 RE: Beverly—Salem Bypass Bridge Dear Mr. Pierce: Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning the results of the historic documentary research conducted by UMass Archaeological Services under contract to the MDPW for the proposed Beverly-Salem Bridge prefect. In response to your request, enclosed please find a copy of the archaeological permit application, which contains a brief summary of the historic background research. if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Brona Simon State Archaeologist Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission Enclosure cc: Robert Johnson, MDPW BS/mw Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617)727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary S�,T TS o MISSZ0 CO �e m'nOnWealth 10 Pte`"IT TO CANU7� A7�'r�'�!,DC-J P.L FT_..L' 7 T-1NW� iC =0N ZiOQ9 Date G'_ Issue April 19, 1989 Expiration Date April 19, 1990 UMASS Archaeological Services is hEr&,ur author-,Zee t0 condu' an a----hae0l091GZ held —noes-gation S-=-,ion 1'7G O rCa�t° 9 G= the �Sle 21 i$Ss all a00or lc L_ she re_.!:.a 10 :s ou�-j nee in 950 CM 70.00. Beverly/Salem Bridge March Street Connector, Salem (Reconnaissance and Intensive Survey) Project Location Brna State st 14assa :.sets HLstoriGal C=ession Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State,Michael j. Connolly,Secretary r UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS The Environmental Institute 4 AT AMHERST Blaisdell House Archaeological Services i Amherst. MA 01003-0040 April 4, 1989 (413) 545-2842 TELEX: 948633 Ms. Brona Simon 'RECEIVED State Archaeologist ll�� Massachusetts Historical Commission 80 Boylston Street APR 11 Iggg Boston, MA 02116 MASS. HIST. COMM. Dear Brona, Enclosed please find a permit application for the field portion of our project with MDPW for the Beverly/Salem Bypass and March Street Connector. The background research was conducted as described in our permit application of March 10, 1989. If you have any questions or comments concerning the application, please give me a call at (413) 548-9161 or 545-1552. Thanks for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Mitchell T. Mulholland MTM/xt The University of Massachusetts Is an Affirmative Action/Equal Oogorfunity Institution 950 CMR: DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE SECRETARY APPENDIX B COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SECRETARY OF STATE: MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION PERMIT APPLICATION: ARCHEOLOGICAL FIELD INVESTIGATION A. General Information Pursuant to Section 27C of Chapter 9 of the General Laws and according to. the regulations outlined in 950 CMR 70.00, a .permit to conduct a field investigation is hereby requested. 1. Name Mitchell T. Mulholland UMASS Archaeological Services Blaisdell House 2. Institution/Address University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003 _ 3. Project Location March Street Peninsula and vicinity 4. Town Salem 5. Attach a copy of a U.S.G.S. quadrangle with the project area clearly marked. 6. Property Owner(s) MDPW and various private owners 7. The- applicant affirms that the owner has been notified and has agreed that the applicant may perform the proposed field investigation. 8. The proposed field investigation is for a: a. Reconnaissance Survey (circle one) Q Intensive Survey c. Site Examination d. Data Recovery B. Professional Qualifications 1. Attach a personnel chart and project schedule as described in 950 CMR 70. 11(b). 2. Include copies of curricula vitarum of key personnel (unless already on file with the State Archeologist.) 950 CMR.- DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE SECRETARY C. Research Design 1. Attach a narrative description of the proposed Research Design according to the requirements of 950 Ci`SR 70. 11. 2. The Applicant agrees to perform the field investigation according to the standards outlined in 950 CMR 70. 13 3. The Applicant agrees to submit a Summary Report prepared according to the standards outlined in 950 CMR 70.14, by !day 3f, 1939 date 4. The specimens recovered during performance of the proposed field investigation will be curated at_the University of Massachusetts (M.G.L. C. 9, s. 27C) curatorial facility SIGNATURE a/' ril 3 1909 APPLICANT DATE PERSONNEL CHART PROJECT DIRECTOR: Mitchell T. Mulholland PREHISTORIC RESEARCH DIRECTOR: same HISTORIC RESEARCH DIRECTOR: S. Mrozowski PROJECT ARCHAEOLOGIST: Leslie Shaw HISTORIAN: Janet McClennan CREW CHIEF: Paul Abbott SPECIALIST: Ellen Savulis - Historic material culture Edward Hood - Resistivity survey FIELD AND LAB CREW: Elizabeth Ehilton - Lab Supervisor OTHER: f PROPOSAL FOR SUBSURFACE ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING OF THE PRE-1684 FRANCIS SKERRY HOUSE AND MARCH STREET PENINSULA, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS - A PART OF STATEWIDE CONTRACT 88014 Presented to: Mr. Robert Johnson Chief Engineer Massachusetts Department of Public Works 10 Park Plaza Boston, Massachusetts 02116 Presented by: University of Massachusetts Archaeological Services The Environmental Institute Blaisdell House University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 April 3, 1989 Principal Investigator Dr. Mitchell T. Mulholland Co-Principal Investigator Dr. Arthur S. Keene I - - 1 PART I SCOPE OF WORK Project Description and Impacts. This document outlines a proposal to conduct subsurface archaeological testing of a portion of the proposed Beverly-Salem Bypass project along the route of the Metropolitan Boston Transit Authority (MBTA)/Boston & Maine (B&M) Railroad line in Salem, Massachusetts (Figures 1 and 2) . The project will be conducted for the Massachusetts Department of Public Works (MDPW) as a part of statewide contract 88019. The overall project extends from Pearl Street north to the end of the March Street Peninsula (Figure 2) and will involve the replacement of the railroad tracks with a highway. The width of the right-of-way is approximately 150 feet and extends into the March Street. Peninsula. A detour road will extend over March Street to March Street Court through undisturbed ground. The project involves the demolition of the railroad tracks, and construction of a new highway. Impacts from the construction are expected to reach to at least 9 feet (1.2 m) . The project is to be conducted for the Massachusetts Department of Public Works. Three large areas were determined to have a high potential to contain the remains of the Old Planters Settlement (the first settlement in Salem) and prehistoric sites during an intensive background research project that preceded this portion of the project. As proposed, the project will impact the pre-1689 Francis Skerry house (see Area 1 - Figure 2), an undisturbed area along the southeast side of the March Street Peninsula, a spit of land which juts westward into the North River. The north part of this area is part of the March Street Bridge project detour (Area 2 - Figure 2). The third area of concern is a narrow strip of land beginning at the southern end of the railroad bridge over the North River, extending to the north end of March Street Court (Area 3 - Figure 3) . All three areas are believed to be location of the original seventeenth century "Old Planters" settlement. The overall extent of the project is from Pearl Street to the north end of the peninsula (Figure 2) . The proposed project involves the repositioning of the Skerry House either on its existinglot elsewhere or e here in order to avoid impacts from the proposed construction of the Beverly-Salem Bypass. The Skerry structure is located on Conant Street and abuts the META and Boston & Main (BSM) Railroad tracks and the North River. In 1980, the project area was examined in a survey conducted by the Institute for Conservation Archaeology (Andrus 1980) on the basis of preliminary plans. Since that survey was completed, more developed project plans show that the Skerry house and the peninsula will be impacted by the new construction plans. The area was also researched at a broader level during an archaeological survey of Salem conducted by Mrozowski, Shaw, Holland and Zisk of the University of Massachusetts (Mrozowski et al. .1987) . Excerpts from that report are included in this proposal. The project included in this proposal consists of background research covering the Old Planters settlement and potential prehistoric sites in the two areas. This survey is the second of two parts: 1) Background research and 2) subsurface archaeological testing. 2 Project area topography. The project area is located along the North River in Salem. and is shown on the Salem USGS quadrangle (Figure 1) . Elevations in the project area range from 16-19 feet (5-6 m) above sea level. In general, the topography is level and covered ed bY residences streets and railroad tracks. The March Street peninsula extends westward into the North River and portions of the land surface has been subject to residential development. There are, however, intermittent undisturbed areas throughout. Archaeological potential of the project area. Historic resources. The area encompassed by the Skerry house and March Street peninsula is the reported location of the earliest European settlement in the town of Salem. The area appears to have been settled by the first English colonists (known as the "Old Planters" ) who arrived on the peninsula in 1626 and were associated with the Dorchester Company. The Planters were governed by Roger Conant. The merchants who formed the Company were interested in exploiting the rich fishing grounds off Cape Ann (modern Gloucester) by drying or salting fish on shore for export to Europe. To that- end, the Dorchester Company established a small year-round colony of fishermen/farmers on Cape Ann who were to grow corn and other food crops and make salt to help support the main fishing fleet. The first .ship with fourteen people arrived at Cape Ann in January, 1624. They erected a substantial frame building and proceeded to establish salt works and stagings (Mrozowski et al. 1987; Phillips 1933:25; Perley 1924:67) . The first houses in the project area were probably not more than very simple cottages, perhaps with stone foundations mortared with clay, wattle and daub walls over a light wooden frame, and a thatched roof (Bentley 1914:iI:366). According to Perley's research, there were nineteen cottages belonging to the Old Planters along the North River (Perley 1924:85) which had all but disappeared by 1661. In that year those who possessed cottages in Salem were given rights to the undivided land and common land (The Records of the Salem Commoners 1713-1739 1903:4) . However; no names associated with the Old Planters appear in the 1661 listings in these Records of those who had cottages at the time. The project area has excellent research potential. Strong documentary testimony points to the area as the original site of Salem's first permanent settlement. Perley's map (1924) shows the location of the cottages in the vicinity of the Skerry house and along the shore of the March Street peninsula. While the veracity of Perley's map is questionable, it appears that the original North River shoreline has not been significantly altered by erosion. The site appears to possess excellent integrity. With the exception of a small number of houses north of the railroad tracks, the area has not been heavily developed (Mrozowski, et al. 1987) . The potential of the project area to contain intact evidence of the early settlement is suggested by a summary of excavations conducted by Capt. J. Osgood in 1801. The following is excerpted from that summary (Bentley 1914 from Mrozowski et al. 1987) . Capt. J. Osgood having purchased part of Woodbridge's estate in Ferry Lane, formerly so called, the lots lying near Horton's point, so called, on the point below Skerry's, fell to his share. Westward of the point the ground rose higher than upon any land below Windmill Point, s having been covered with Locusts, it had acquired a soil which gave it the appearance of a nole (sic) rising from the natural soil. Capt. Osgood 3 made the purchase among other purposes to remove this ground from North River side to Planter's marsh side, & in digging he found the natural six feet below & that this was only accumulated land, blown from Horton's point. On the ground he found several Loads of Rocks bedded in Clay as was usual in the Cottages made by the first settlers. Upon this hearth he found coals from oak wood, & cinders from fossil coals, specimens of which I took away and preserved. Around these ruins the sands probably accumulated, as the Clay and rocks were bedded in the natural soil. The rocks must have been brought from Lobster point 1/4 of a mile or from Beverly side. They were rude & of irregular shapes (Bentley 1914:II:366). The subsurface testing follows the background research which focused upon primary sources, particularly the land transactions of the Old Planters in order to trace the locations of the original cottages. Other primary documents reviewed in the background research include the Commoners Records, documents which detail the use of common lands, depositions of court transactions, and letters. On the basis of previous research, it is believed that some of the cottage properties were converted to common lands once they were abandoned. These documents researched support the location of the Old Planters cottages as being in the project area (see Appendix A) and that very little disturbance has taken place in the area since the eighteenth century. The purpose of the subsurface testing will be to locate the remains of the settlement and any prehistoric sites, in land use in the project area throughout the historic period, and to locate recorded historic structures or their remains. Sources relied upon from earlier research conducted in the project area included local, county, state and regional histories, deeds and other primary documents, historic maps of the area which date from the seventeenth century to the early twentieth century, gazetteers, and records at the Massachusetts Historical Commission. Boring logs, reviewed during background research provided information concerning potential subsurface disturbance. Prehistoric .Resources. The project area has a high potential to contain small prehistoric sites. Eight prehistoric sites are recorded in the vicinity of the North/Danvers River estuary. Little is recorded concerning the contents of the sites. Most appear to have been occupied during the Woodland period (the past 3,000 years) and at least one contained Late Archaic period materials including a ground stone gouge. Four of the sites have shell midden deposits, two of which contained oyster shells suggesting a warmer and more brackish marine environment than today (Braun 1974; Mrozowski et al. 1987) . One site (19-ES-409) contained faunal remains suggestive of good preservation of organic materials in the area. Rationale for project stratification and ,field testing. For effective survey of the project area, the impact zones will be stratified (ranked) according to their potential to contain archaeological resources. This will be accomplished on the basis of results from prehistoric and historic background research. Historic sites will be predicted on the basis of maps and other documents, as well as the suitability of the area to have been used for historic occupation and industry. Maps frequently reveal the location of houses, outbuildings, mills and other businesses; meetinghouses, cemeteries and churches. Data derived from the Massachusetts Census and appropriate histories frequently provide information concerning the industrial emphasis and land use throughout the 4 historic period. Sites predicted to be within the project area will be evaluated during the field survey. Following the completion of the historical background research, an intensive visual reconnaissance will be conducted in areas that are predicted to contain historic features or sites, and shovel test pits will be excavated in these areas to detect the sites. This will include a thorough reconnaissance along all undisturbed areas in the project area. The placement of test pits in areas of historic sensitivity will be as determined necessary by the Project Historian. There is seldom documentary evidence of prehistoric sites. Therefore, prehistoric sites will be predicted on the basis of an environmental model - which uses geological, soils and climatic maps, known site locations in the southern New England region and expected prehistoric site locational behavior. The archaeological record of prehistoric sites in the region shows that the majority are situated on well-drained ground in the supply. The location of early historic trails which may have followed the same routes as prehistoric trails will also be used to determine the potential of the area to contain prehistoric sites. This information will be derived from the documentary research. It is thus possible to stratify the project area into zones of high, moderate and low potential to contain archaeological sites, according to soil !. matrix and distance to water. Areas less than 1,000 feet (300 m) from water, on level, dry, well-drained soil are considered areas of high potential. These areas will require a sampling interval of 25 ft (6 m) , because small prehistoric sites are expected in the area. This interval will also be adequate to intercept small historic foundations and refuse deposits. Areas greater than 1,000 feet (300 m) from water, but on well-drained soil are considered to have moderate potential. Areas that are poorly drained, steep, or that have been disturbed are considered to have low potential. No field testing is recommended in these areas. Areas that require subsurface testing. All of the areas to be tested are within 1,000 feet (300 m) of the North River. The area reported to contain the remains of the cottages are within 200 feet (60 m) of the river. Areas that are not to be tested are too disturbed from road, railroad or residential construction, and are therefore unlikely to contain sites. Areas to be tested will be subject to a walkover, and areas that appear to require testing will be evaluated. The background research determined that three large areas should be subject to subsurface testing. The project will begin with an initial phase of shovel test pit excavation in order to determine the depth of fill in the three areas. Following this, two 60 by 60m square blocks will be placed on the basis of expected site location and then subjected to an electrical resistivity survey. Anomalies detected during the resistivity survey will then be tested using hand-excavated trenches approximately 2 m by 50 cm. The purpose of the initial resistivity survey will be to assure that soil conditions are suitable for the method. On the basis of the results of the initial survey the subsurface testing plan will be modified if necessary and the remainder of the survey will begin. The order of priority for the three areas are: Area 2 and detour vicinity, Area 3 and Area 1. The following areas will be tested during this phase of survey: 5 Area 1 The Skerry house� _� u e lot. The objective of the excavation will be to locate the remains of the Old Planters settlement and the remains of First Period occupation of the Skerry house. The area to be tested is approximately 35 by 35m (less the area occupied by the Skerry House). Sixteen shovel test pits will be excavated to evaluate the depth of fill and to test areas predicted by the Project Archaeologist to contain features or sites. This area will require a resistivity survey of two 20 by 20m blocks, placed on the basis of the potential of the area to contain sites or features. Ten hand-excavated trenches, approximately 2 m by 50 cm will. be excavated to evaluate anomalies mapped in the resistivity survey. A backhoe will( be used for one-half day to assist in the removal of overburden (if fill is extensive) . The excavation of preliminary STPs will be used to determine the appropriateness of the backhoe. If conditions are appropriate (e.g. large amounts of fill or recent overburden) the backhoe may be used to excavate several additional trenches. The backhoe also may be used to expose early historic or prehistoric features or sites. Once exposed, intact areas will be excavated by hand. Profiles will be drawn for all trenches. In some cases it may be necessary to widen STPs and trenches to reach greater depths than normal. The actual placement of the test pits and trenches will be guided by the background research and resistivity testing. Some of the STPs may be connected to create trenches of elongated test pits in order to reach below the depth range of a test pit. Area 2) The March Street peninsula and detour area. This area includes a strip of land from the river's edge (west of Carlton School) north to the area surrounding the March Street bridge (Figure 2) and will require excavation to locate the remains of the Old Planters settlement and prehistoric sites on the March Street peninsula. The area is approximately 107m by 24 m wide. The actual placement of the test pits will be guided by the background research which preceded this survey. Twenty-four shovel test pits will be excavated to evaluate the depth of fill and to test areas predicted by the Project Archaeologist to contain features or sites. This area will require a resistivity survey of three 20 by 20m blocks, placed on the basis of the potential of the area to contain sites or features. Fifteen hand-excavated trenches, approximately 2 m by 50 cm will be excavated to evaluate anomalies mapped in the resistivity survey. A backhoe will be used for one-half day to assist in the removal of overburden (if fill is extensive) . The excavation of preliminary STPs will be used to determine the . appropriateness of the backhoe. If conditions are appropriate (e.g. large amounts of fill or recent overburden) the backhoe may be used to excavate several additional trenches. The backhoe also may be used to expose early historic or prehistoric features or sites. Once exposed, intact areas will be excavated by hand. Profiles will be drawn for all trenches. In some cases it may be I' necessary to widen STPs and trenches to reach greater depths than normal. The actual placement of the test pits and trenches will be guided by the background research and resistivity testing. Some of the STPs may be connected to create trenches of elongated test pits in order to reach below the depth range of a test pit. 6 Area 21 the March Street Court/Thorndike Avenue area. This area includes a strip of land from the river 's edge (south of the Railroad bridge over the North river) south to the area surrounding the north end of March Street Court (Figure 2) and will require excavation to locate the remains of the Old Planters settlement and prehistoric sites on the March Street peninsula. The actual placement of the test pits will be guided by the background research which preceded this survey. Sixteen shovel test pits will be excavated to evaluate the depth of fill and to test areas predicted by the Project Archaeologist to contain features or sites. This area will require a resistivity survey of two 20 by 20m blocks, placed on the basis of the potential of the area to contain sites or features. Ten hand-excavated trenches, approximately 2 m by 50 cm will be excavated to evaluate anomalies mapped in the resistivity survey. A backhoe will be used for one-half day to assist in the removal of overburden (if fill is extensive) . The excavation of preliminary STPs will be used to determine the appropriateness of the backhoe. If conditions are appropriate (e.g. large amounts of fill or recent overburden) the backhoe may be used to excavate several additional trenches. The backhoe also may be used to expose early historic or prehistoric features or sites. Once exposed, intact areas will be excavated by hand. Profiles will be drawn for all trenches. In some cases it may be necessary to widen STPs and trenches to reach greater depths than normal. The actual placement of the test pits and trenches will be guided by the background research and resistivity testing. Some of the STPs may be connected to create trenches of elongated test pits in order to reach below the depth range of a test pit. Additional areas. Additional areas to be tested include the vicinity of Curtis Park (Figure 2) which is a part of the proposed detour. This area will require the excavation of 16 STPs. South of the intersection of March Street Court and March Street, the detour passes through potentially undisturbed ground. This area will be tested with 16 STPs. In addition, 16 STPs are reserved for excavation at the discretion of the Project Archaeologist. In addition to the test pits, a back-hoe may be used for one-half day and 5 hand excavated trenches - may be excavated. The backhoe trenches and hand-excavated trenches will be placed in any of the additional areas at the discretion of the archaeologist. Placement will determined on the basis of the potential of an area to contain features or sites. NOTE: If soil conditions are not appropriate for resistivity testing, the time allotted for resistivity (14 days) will be used for subsurface testing. During the course of the survey, on the basis of soil conditions it may be necessary to excavate less than predicted in one area and more in another. The total number of STDs for the project area is expected to be 104. Forty 2 m by 50 cm trenches will be excavated in high potential areas, and a backhoe is reserved for two days to assist in the removal of overburden of areas with high potential to contain the remains of the Old Planter's settlement and prehistoric sites. Historic references (e.g., see Bentley 1914 above) suggest that there may be as much as m (6 feet) of fill covering portions of the area. Backhoe trenches may be connected if 7 appropriate. Clusters of Shovel Test Pits (STPs) will be placed in the areas of high and moderate potential to contain sites on the basis of stratification and specific site locations predicted during background research. The interval between test pits will not exceed 8 m in areas of high prehistoric and historic site potential. In some cases, single STPs will be used to evaluate small areas. The number of test pits per cluster and the depth of excavation will be chosen by the Project Archaeologist on the basis of field conditions. Sampling Strategy. The principles behind resistivity are as follows. The ground between two points will have a measurable resistance to the passage of current. This varies according to the density of the medium through which the current is passing, and is effected by the amount of air space between the soil particles, the moisture and chemical conditions of the soil, and the distance between the probes used to introduce and measure the current. Variation in many cases can be attributed to cultural factors. Human alteration can cause changes in the density of the soil matrix such as grave shafts, buried foundations or back filled trenches. Moisture and chemical characteristics can also be of cultural origin as with wells and middens. Variation in the spacing of electrodes (termed "A" spacing) will also vary the depth of penetration. In evaluating soil resistivity in archaeology, the absolute value of measured resistance is not particularly meaningful but becomes so in the context of other readings. Measurements are taken either along transects or, if a number of transects are run contiguously, in a grid pattern using a fixed electrode spacing and applied current. Anomalously high and low readings are identified by studying the relationship between these measurements. Anomalous readings indicate areas of archaeological interest. During any one survey, electrode spacing is held constant and areas are surveyed during stable periods of weather. In this way, variations caused by these factors are kept as constant as possible, making contrasts of interest more discernable. The target subsurface anomalies of the Salem resistivity survey will be features related to the cottages of the Old Planters settlement. The expectation with the methodology that was employed is that the soil disturbed by the excavation of the foundation and the placement of stones in the sandy matrix will contrast from the surrounding soil. In particular, the disturbed areas should contain more air space between soil particles creating a higher resistance to electrical current. This may be confounded in some cases by poor drainage or present vegetation such as trees or recent cultural activities such as, in the Salem project area, artificial fill. This can have the effect of masking other features or appearing as an anomaly of its own. The results of the resistivity survey will be plotted by computer as contour maps and the anomalies will be evaluated through subsurface testing. In zones of high site potential, clusters of shovel test pits (STPs) should be excavated at intervals no greater than 25 feet (8 m), or when necessary at locations chosen at the discretion of the Project Archaeologist. Test pit intervals are chosen onthe basis of the size of historic and prehistoric sites expected to be within the project area. In areas of lesser potential, the interval will remain the same, but there will be fewer clusters. Soil "bucket" augurs may be used to assess the extent of disturbance near roads and existing structures. 8 STDs, 40 by 40 centimeters square (2 shovel widths), should be excavated to the depth of culturally sterile soil. This size of pit permits adequate observation of soil profiles and subsurface prehistoric and historic features. Test pits should be excavated at approximately 10 cm levels in order to obtain approximate depths of any artifacts that are recovered. STPs are, in most cases, not expected to extend to at least 50-70 centimeters in depth. Depths will be greater in floodplain areas of the North River and will require the excavation of trenches or backhoe trenches in lieu of STPs. In the area of the Old Planter's cottages the depth of overburden could be as great as 2 m (6 feet) and if deep will require the use of a backhoe to remove artificial fill. STPs, hand-excavated trenches and backhoe trenches will be placed on the basis of the results of the background research, to evaluate anomalies detected by the resistivity survey and on the basis of the judgement of the Project Archaeologist. The effectiveness of the sampling strategy is based on its ability to intercept locations of aboriginal and historical activity. The project area is expected to contain small historic foundations, probably not smaller than 20 to 30 feet. Small, short-term occupation prehistoric sites are also expected to exist in the project area because of its distance to water and well-drained level soil. The eight meter (25 ft) interval is close enough to reliably intercept a wide range of small archaeological features (such as prehistoric campsites and historic foundations) and thin deposits (such as lithic scatters and historic sheet refuse). The 8 meter interval provides 958 confidence of intercepting a roughly circular shaped site with a diameter of 10 to 13 meters or larger. The 40 cm by 40 cm shovel test pit (STP) has a confidence level of 958 for detecting an artifact density of 20 items or more per square meter. The strategy as a whole provides a 798 reasonable certainty of intercepting sites 10 meters in diameter and is 808 sure of detecting 10 artifacts per square meter. Larger sites of 15 meter diameters and Greater densities of 35 artifacts per square meter are detectable at the 998 confidence level. Such sites might include small temporary prehistoric shelters and butchering areas, small cottage and outbuilding foundations, or dumps; and smaller features and activity areas such as campsites, privies, storage facilities, burials, small prehistoric lithic scatters, hearths, and so on. The interval has the added advantage of providing even coverage of a sensitive area, and provides data that facilitate the computation of site, feature and artifact densities and their distributions. Timing of Project Completion. Upon official authorization to proceed with the project from the sponsor and the university, UMAS will begin the field survey. Upon completion of the field work, a letter summarizing our findings will be submitted to the MDPW. The field survey is not expected to exceed three weeks. The time required to complete the project and to submit a draft final report for review is approximately eight weeks from the completion of laboratory analysis. The length of time required to complete the laboratory tasks will depend upon the volume of artifacts recovered from the field. It is anticipated that laboratory analysis will not exceed three weeks. UMAS Archaeologists will work closely with the Massachusetts Department of Public Works to effectively complete the project in a timely manner. We anticipate that the project will take approximately 14 weeks to complete (from the time an account for the project is established by the UMASS Accounting Department). Following the Department's review, UMAS will submit B I B L I O G R A P H Y Andrus, Scott 1980 Management Summary Report: Phase I, Step 1 Archaeological Surevy of the Construction Of the Peabody-Salem Route 128 Connector (Task B) . Report 108 producedby the Institute for Conservation Archaeology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Cambridge for the Massachusetts Department of Public Works. Bentley, William 1914 The Diary of William Bentley, D.D. , Pastor of the East Church, Salem, Massachusetts. Vols. 1-4. January 1811-December 1819. The Essex Institute, Salem. Braun, David 1974 Explanatory Models for the Evolution of Coastal Adaptation in Prehistoric Eastern New England. American Antiquity 39:582-596. Massachusetts Historical Commission 1979 Cultural Resources in Massachusetts: A Model for Management. Massachusetts Historical Commission. Office of the State Secretary, Boston. Mrozowski, S., L. Shaw, M. Holland and J. Zisk 1987 Salem, Massachusetts: An Archaeological Survey of the City. University of Massachusetts, Boston. Produced for the City of Salem. Perley, Sidney 1912 The History of Salem, Massachusetts, Vol. I, 1626-1637 pub. 1924; Vol. II, 1638-1670 pub. 1926; Vol. III, 1671-1716, pub. 1928. Sidney Perley, Salem. Phillips, James Duncan 1933 Salem in the Seventeenth Century. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. sF Go a 4�cl. s� llyrtal �jwVd / Y sn p aa _ (o Hill C /Skk.J ` •+ er r �� s..o e\Y \\\l _ / C,�i/ �_ r Jo 1 �� ✓i5 h ' v�j 1 "l a �y\'A� r `�./i 2vs%/n/o♦/ \ _� �� - �t 1>_v-6/'SDrt/ t \ JOrs� / Y/ a/°u♦{/` )0/ > _ a ra.L— ,+Gens '� )NTERCHA Zn/ I �? ! 3 �....7 �. `^ ,! / ,�A \ �� r 1�p J`: 1 ~ \.`0 • 11% F LPD5 215-P1—� `..... 1%,111 ✓ _ a •43426lank ��> -� �4ters T\G� )11. `�I J' \. �a�.. �-! I �i\�.• i :,.�''-rz i �p'- o1 �.t k`LlMr,61 `: /( ._ �\,��l GeMn0 >.,I W? -a �^'� � - ' _ \/ ',\SaiiecssSM36 '-` — GalFOo,Isl 1:1 Pt/ 6 /'_m r ✓�._ z \ f.^ i. • i / L . _J _ T "Peters Tuck ..I \\) t row ooIt a `) ` • ` }i eters h P )1 1 Pak ! .� LoFste PI<k _J - \ I T / flocks, '6t <2r Goll Co sem 2 iia' EEVERB 1' HARBOR 2h y " Gy 6,JOK➢F C J 1 IRyery ) Kt uxtOnw. G, n�F artF/ Cemetery ,V< 4 ^tea' Hill' .• pyo L e'. .`,163 �5 v. C SCF I fit TM, _6ch 1^ - \ e / 1 t y / v, SOX fI♦i�t�'11V4 �4_ J Taal; 4 ,�j f �' �♦.•C. o Fia1. _ jc" �C` . a �^•.. _ �` ��r [ omr f e al SherM n f is :1 u _ Ste Pick rule JI8 _ c p;TWal Scn>: a:'` Mo Lmenta -c>F- Sck- Sta. .SA0 rf[{ \ () ilaf ' ABODY e w a a ` • Sta C�r�'' ° pr i 0:= .� e pv t5 roes 000 ��! P1 .3 Harmon)GP c 1 Ef 1, p ' ._- • '-.: St Johnsem : r t - B¢,D,. / CeteY / �20 8 ll Po SCp Yy" ,q Wu "Pd F `su �r CeT HII / t /1 T_ PFt1 pa a 3 ' M sen ` vSSt Man s' y'it�'c:_/ \ FM /'♦ HaLI {O iJ ' _.(! �y�oMSeh9 f Scb eases_ �:. `` .- ♦ �� G70 _ — ,rF s h —� —0 _.� \ , G HoMS `•=: S :i ,4..� RHOR5r1 _I Wharf ` I 'stSALEM/ . 32 4 hleadou , •�ws x _ `T�. pfd/ , 1 S�teMrae t- Long-Pt—r ,* �Ponjl ,. Taox L V P na , / v SS±baia SN. ' `t Palmer- c rrCO?) 3 `i rI y� J ' S.W. yam* a Has t is � alrner,�6/ -Cy.f i=" �oG6 SALEM, MASS. SCALE 1:25 000 0 I MILE N4230—W7052.5/7.5 I )aro _e ow 20 3JOL 4000 5DW 6000 �00o FEET ( 1970 1 t .. 1 KILOMETER �< PHOTOREVISED 1979 / 5 p AMS 6869 111 SW SERIES V614 T at wnnrqft , - 4 L� ad e �3 + y F\ 166 1 �\ �� HLA PARK iT t, \ _ _ #�` Ob /X10 (L YNN) 341 f' L .. 55' 343 3 1� , ---- --_ . 145 3�E v ,168 rV NW - ROAD CLASSIFICATION -E 1:25000 1 MILE P,Im,ry hiohwav Lieht dutv road. hard or a _ -- — r APL-A �. AlAR6N STREET PENINSULA q NORrH RIVER / n ❑ _ l ,a0 Rat, Inc Aiuiel X 0 awl I 0�° a q� 'a ihcx sr�r-cvaRz —J _: _ _- '1 _ a n �y-, ❑ �i�CCURTIS eex c --_� SALEM SHOE �c1E 4, CPARKI i0 a I-� iru .J I�IOn U ° ISIHousE C=9 jCTONJWC;T %, ❑ Q9 I eI"II SCHOOL I I !'w Lam::: - se �d� D�ioU .Q `�O C3 I • ISI II p c>• ' � I II QIb�,p o � o I ool o I ko 4 l b /good\ QIWIp cello Q;�,J, oo iWlo 0 9 I I o ol�l B Ilo I ' �llsla I s O Q Igl�l �I1� "10 ° o�Ql� _L7°6_ � QIWICOO plvl ❑110 ®/ —_ .. 0� ��IF� I L4ReEr �Io SIN x.77 �d�� 01 1 g�o� o I�Ioc3o a' ': ,n17 _� — Er 2 -ll^'� 0 2 , ,4fo ROSS — - i Ll IL�o J Q D J — — I2 11 I �o� a C� � I rOiHG�Lo� o Ice �] d� WW C = ___ _- 1 000a� i ° Imlp 1 Unn I o J ,_,--a- J w0008 RIOCE HOUSE _ Jl— -- sr- I CC��II IA JEi a _— BR106E O� �� V� ►�� odd — — I�U_ � OLi -- _77 ry 00 (bQ dOOI I /o p dl to /.� I o Ileo of l of l a�O of tc �g Op ) lO pl Doll I .. -31 1c.] / X11 �- — IQ ° al Ice °pl1 al to j0 o\\ )II II //(/iQ oI Ij'I ��I I� a I Ice of I MHAING oto /,Oa E� - o co O ,) 1 I a O O \ ' II (TANK I Oft] Ipoq�or3 oll0o . . ❑ .. r�r-] .r I / I SALE.GAS CO- I T1 ,-� �� LIIO ,lnc�rojnA ) 1 V 1 BRIDGE STREET CORRIDOR L . J LA- 1 - -� 0 300 600 FEET Eft S METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND RESEARCH ON THE OLD PLANTERS 'SETTLEMENT , SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS Introduction Background research has been completed for the portions of the Beverly-Salem Bypass project that extend from Pearl Street north to the end of the March Street peninsula. The study was conducted by UMASS Archaeological Services for the Massachusetts Department of Public Works . The study focused on the area believed to have been the settlement of the seventeenth century "Old Planters" located along the North River . At the outset of the project secondary documentary sources suggested that this "First Period" settlement is situated within the project area , specifically on the March Street peninsula and in the vicinity of the seventeenth century Skerry House . Background research of primary sources strengthens the information from the secondary sources , and provides evidence that Native American sites may also be present in the area. Undisturbed portions of the area also have. a high potential to contain prehistoric archaeological sites . Following the early residential use of the area , the project area was in use throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as agricultural land . In the 19th century, the railroad was constructed through the area . During the late 19th and 20th idertial settlement intensified . However, the proposed highway corridor passes through large areas that have not apparently been impacted by I'esidential or railroad Con:;trUC+ i J;: . On the basis of the evidence researched during this study , there are undisturbed portions of the project area that have a high potential to contain evidence of the Old Planters settlement , and prehistoric sites . It is recommended that several areas will require subsurface archaeological testing . These include the area surrounding the Skerry house, the area to be impacted along the March Street peninsula, which includes a detour extending east and west of the railroad tracks . A meeting is scheduled for March 21 , 1988 to discuss the areas that require subsurface testing . At that meeting areas recommended for testing will be shown on detailed project plans . Results of Background Research The purpose of the research conducted was to- ascertain what documentary evidence, if any, exists for the location of the original settlement of Salem by the Old Planters , 1626-28 , on the east bank of the North River (between modern-day Lemon Street and the Essex Bridge , west of Bridge Street) . An exhaustive search of the literature and old records was conducted utilizing the facilities of the Essex Institute in Salem and the Essex County Registry of Deeds . Upon the demise of the plantation at Cape Ann, established by r 6r the Dorchester Company in 1623 , several of the settlers ( including wives and children) , under the leadership of Roger Conant , moved in 1626 to an area more favorable for agriculture known by the Indian name of "Naumkeag , " later renamed "Salem. " Primary source evidence concerning this earliest settlement by the Old Planters is provided by two sworn depositions taken in 1680 in connection with the Mason claim to ownership of land in Salem . One of the depositons was taken from Humphrey Woodbury, son of the Old Planter John Woodbury , who came to Naumkeag with his father in 1628 , a month or two before the arrival of John Endecott . Humphrey gave a short history of his fathers connection with the Dorchester Company at Cape Ann, how "afterwards some of them removed to a neck of land called Salem, " and that his father was sent to England to represent the new plantation . When he and his father arrived "at the place now called Salem in or about the month of June , 1628 . . . we found several persons that said they were servants to the Dorchester Company, & had built. another house for them at Salem besides that at Cape Ann . " Further along he claimed that "when we settled the Indians never then molested us in our improvements or settling downe either on Salem or Beverly sides of the Ferry . . . but chewed themselves very glad of our Company, & came & planted near us , & often times came to us for shelter , saying they were afraid of their Enemey Indians up the country; & we did shelter them when they fled to us , & we had their free leave to build & plant where we have takes: up lands . " According to various -,,::count- such as that of Francis Higginson in his New England Plantation , the Indians along the New England coast had been severely reduced in number by a plague "about twelve years since [ 1629] . . . They do generally profess to like well of our coming and planting here; partly because there is abundance of ground that they cannot possess or make use of, and partly because our being here will be a means both of relief to them when they want , and also a defence from their enemies , . . . . . .. The second deposition was taken from Richard Brackenberry who accompanied John Endecott when he arrived at Naumkeag in 1628 as governor representing the "Massachusetts Pattentees " which had bought out the rights of the Dorchester Company . Brackenberry reported that ''wee came ashore at the place now called Salem'' where "wee found liveing, old Goodman Norman and his conn; William Allen and Walter Knight & otheres . . . they had sundry houses built at Salem , as alsoe John Woodberye , Mr . Conant , Peeter Palfery, John Balch & others . . . . . .. Brackenberry was given a strip of land fronting the North River ( in the approximate area of Skerry Street) where he built a douse near the River . According to the Salem Book of Grants (original town records ) , at "A Towne meeting this 21th of the '6th month 1637 , " it was ordered that "mr Connonts house , ground, and half acre of corne standing on the same . . . shalbe bought by the Towne for ould mr william Plase and the Towne to mak payment thereof . " ..mr . Connont" (Roger Conant) was present at this meeting as one of the town officers . By 1637 lie had moved to a grant of land on the Beverly side . Another primary source of evidence is a report by Dr . William Bentley of Salem , in a diary entry dated March 17 , 1801 , that Capt . J . Osgood, while digging soil from a lot he owned near Horton " s point (at the foot of March Street on the North River) , found "several Loads of Rocks bedded in Clay as was usual in the Cottages made by the first settlers . Upon this hearth he found coals from oak wood , & cinders from fossil coals , specimens of which I took away & preserved . Around these ruins the sands probably accumulated , as the Clay & rocks were bedded in the natural soil . " In a chapter on the topography of the Salem area in The History of Salem, Sidney Perley mentions the presence of a layer of clay seventy-two feet thick on Bridge Street . On the east side of Bridge Street , near the Essex Bridge, is a marsh known as the Old Planters Marsh. It would have been a nearby source of roofing thatch as well as fodder for the cattle brought by the Old Planters from Cape Ann . Early on at least some of the land in this area was reserved fvr cattle grazing . According to the Town Records of Salem for the " 12th moneth 1634" it was "agreed that the townes neck of land shalbe preserved to feed the Catle on the Lords dayes and therefore particular men shall n[ot] feed theire goats there at other tymes , but bring them to the [ ] that grasse may grow against the Lords dayes . " There is evidence traced out by Sidney Perley, George Phippen, and W . P . Upham from testimony sworn in registry deeds and the Records of the Salem Commoners 1713-1739 that there were at least twenty cottages along the bank of the North River between Lemon Street and the Essex Bridge prior to 1661 , the year of the Cottagers Act which gave a right to the free use of grazing fields to those owning cottages in Salem constructed prior to that year . Perley indicated the approximate position of these twenty cottages on a map accompanying his report tracing property ownership along the },lank of the North River . In addition , other extant documentary evidence from explorers and historians of the period gives geographical reasons for the east bank of the North River being a suitable choice for settlement by the Old Planters (Planters Plea, [Rev . John. White] ; History of New England , Wm Hubbard ; Description of Massachusetts , Wm. Wood) . Although the documentary evidence does not allow us to specific locations'' for the'cottages of the earliest settlers; the Old Planters , it does confirm that they had constructed "sundry houses" (Brackenberry' s deposition) by 1628 and the presence of at least twenty first-period cottages along the east bank of the North River . 4- Prehistoric potential The project area has a high potential to contain prehistoric sites . Given the well-drained sandy soil, abutting the North River, the area is a prime location for prehistoric habitation sites and fishing camps . At least eight prehistoric sites are recorded in the vicinity of the North/Danvers River estuary. Little is recorded concerning the contents of the sites . Most appear to have been occupied during the Woodland period ( the past 3 , 000 years ) and at least one contained Late Archaic period materials including a ground stone gouge . Four of the sites have shell midden deposits , two of which contained oyster shells suggesting a warmer and more brackish marine environment than today (Braun 1974 ; Mrozowski et al . 1987 ) . One site ( 19-ES-409 ) contained faunal remains suggestive of good preservation of organic materials in the area . A human burial , believed to be Native American was discovered at the southern end of Bridge Street in the nineteenth century and a reported Native American village is also reported in the area on the opposite side of the river (MHC numbers not yet assigned for these sites ) . Documentary sources (discussed in the historical section above) also suggest that historic period Native Americans lived in the immediate vicinity, and inhabited the Old Planter ' s settlement f _ protection from the i_ enemies . 9 6 copies of the final report to the sponsor. Upon notice of the Department's approval, UMAS will obtain a permit to conduct archaeological investigations in the Commonwealth. The background portion of the survey can be conducted without a permit. Level of effort and ability to perform. The subsurface archaeological portion of the project will involve a maximum of 62 crew person days, plus 29 days for the Project Archaeologist. A resistivity specialist will require 7 days with an assistant for 7 days. Laboratory analysis is budgeted for 25 days, plus 12 days for a specialist in the analysis of historic material culture. ITS o Ir j COD C n * RECEIVED 0 June 5, 1989 1c '4111ISSZo �� JUN 03 1989 it to Anne Harris onWeattP hUfilil REPT. Salem Historical Commission One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 RE: Beverly-Salem Bypass Dear Ms. Harris: Thank you for your expressed interest in the effects which the Beverly-Salem Bypass and the March Street Bridge projects might have on the significant historic and archaeological properties. The MHC recognizes the importance of your input as an interested party in the "Section 106" consultation process. ENclosed please find a copy of materials which were submitted to the MHC by MDPW concerning the March Street Bridge project and the results of the archaeological survey, which was conducted by UMass. Please let me know if you have any comments. I would appreciate hearing from you by June 16, 1989 if you have any comments so that MHC can respond to the MDPW in a time y manner. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, TlJ �>'J1tiA J !�r/Vt Brona Simon State Archaeologist Deputy State Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission Enclosure cc: Ellen DiGeronimo, MDPW Robert Johnson, MDPW Don Klima, ACHP James Walsh, FHWA BS/kb Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617)727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary