17. Cultural Resources AssessmentChanhassen 2005 Attemative Urban Areawide Review 2016 Update
APPENDIX 3-CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT (INCLUDING AVIENDA
PHASE 1 ARCHEAOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY)
CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
FOR THE CHANHASSEN ALTERNATIVE
URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW (AUAR),
CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY,
MINNESOTA
Submitted to:
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
Submitted by:
The 106 Group Ltd.
May 2003
CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE
CHANHASSEN ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW
AUAR), CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
SHPO File No. Pending
The 106 Group Project No. 03-12
Submitted to:
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
123 North Third Street
Suite 100
Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659
Submitted by:
The 106 Group Ltd.
The Dacotah Building
370 Selby Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55102
Report Authors:
William E. Stark, M.A.
Andrea C. Vermeer, M.A., RPA
May 2003
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 METHODS 3
2.1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH METHODS 3
2.2 ARCHAEOLOGY STUDY AREA 3
2.3 ARCHAEOLOGY FIELD METHODS 3
2.4 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY STUDY AREA 4
2.5 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY FIELD METHODS 4
3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS 5
3.1 ARCHAEOLOGY 5
3.2 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY 5
4.0 RESULTS 7
4.1 ARCHAEOLOGY 7
4.1 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY 8
REFERENCES CITED 12
APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B: LIST OF PERSONNEL
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. STUDY AREA AND ARCHAEOLOGY RESULTS 2
FIGURE 2. ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY RESULTS 9
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN STUDY AREA 5
TABLE 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN ONE MILE OF STUDY AREA 5
TABLE 3. ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY PROPERTIES 10
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On May 21, 2003, The 106 Group Ltd. (The 106 Group) conducted a cultural resources
assessment for the Chanhassen Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) in
Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. The assessment was conducted under contract
with Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. for the City of Chanhassen. The study area is
located in Sections 22, 23, 26, and 27, T116N, R23W (Figure 1). This report is intended
to provide preliminary cultural resources information for completion of the AUAR and to
assist in future compliance requirements under federal and state law. If the regulatory
review for this project is at the state or local level, consultation with the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is appropriate. If there will be any federal
involvement in the future (for example, through funding or permitting), consultation with
the applicable federal agency and SHPO is required.
The purpose of this cultural resources assessment was to identify any historic properties
within the study area of the Chanhassen AUAR that require further investigation in order
to determine their potential eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) and to eliminate those properties that are clearly not eligible. In addition,
the survey assessed the project area's potential for containing previously unidentified
archaeological resources. Should the boundaries of the Chanhassen AUAR be altered
from their current configuration, the study area for architecture-history and
archaeological resources will need to be adjusted as appropriate.
The cultural resources assessment for the AUAR included background research, a visual
reconnaissance of the entire study area, assessment of archaeological potentials within the
study area, and photographic documentation of buildings and structures 50 years of age
or older within the study area. The study area for archaeological and architecture-history
resources was approximately 650 acres (263 hectares).
KEY 4,
moi-: i ' is i7„__ n,, • 9 \._
D o._
Study Area I
fir
r I, I.•' iff''•i •, ..;,s'+ti:
is..:.k.,..
i.i" I\%3•_ J
Previously Reported Site 0
N`: + "
r --,
ce'' , ' - - 1.•,A. jf' .1. • ,"'.••..\,r _ - _
t.,{.
zt .--
L__ I Area of Low Archaeological Potential •••••••'..'..°:'`;
S1
11111 Area of High Archaeological Potential y 1 It."-1•'?-'
i±......, '• ,'
i`,
1,•
1:
Jam% ,?.
P ,%JII. CLi!ff ,i?Yi SL!ro .
111T"
r.•101Y.
4.':''wj'l: X,,•.`, I '.. Ir ,j ;j.• .`i.•7;• Ii.c. :g,• )r1:!---;-% ,.. y• ` • - ;1j ' •
iW• a `,,..-.i,,..1 I`''" • k,i:!..:741.•:,•
Lis'
i •'lb% • :.' •c •ire , ti:- .
r' • rt.:I. j +
1 ^. . '' ;. .
l..y am. _ , . y;• r t • h ,
r,.: z.. ,
r., .4-%6; .ti 21CRaj 21CRa "+• ,J' ' `•
1::: :A1.1'.',..., :
Ste-• j- 1 •e
rf•N,•,'n)'''.' • 14.77:4, ,-, /;:•••,••;.:•;^,..y:c: ."44,;,..:•;,.
1:
t.'•tii'•• .. ..''''.•!f•-fr-,.i_....;,- --:- "? '
f; •.. y
r,yh'r;1,Isa •1' I moi;r ,v L:'.';-..,;.1-r• r1„:;.„:..,1•:.• :•.::-.';•7:7...* ,1 ,..".,.
or.?'
11,1 -I.I•` • •.i.; '•/. .ti. -ir: '• X
I M— '
kr' -' ..'CiF.'UI3Q:'- qi7i r ' .',...._g,'" '1 '
r' ii ,
y•'
r - '
d`. _ ,, L
4147,
I. .., ,-P\' .*".• .•'-'•:;,'f• _ % .1:-';‘,..;•.*: _,i•f • ...'-'-.1.!-,:.y "at1,
4:---...2,--Ii.1•,i '47... • ( w
4.1:' N.i.r`r.: _w . ,.q,•• w; M — . ..,.^;,
1i'':••.
ti•• 7`p. •^/.. ,`1 .:
y1.{
2. ,%x
F'•{,'. .\,h.,a,.j.,` BI
z•.
ice•: ''
C. .•'• 11'
S4jl: v3 1 C: '"•: : q.
mei.:.. r. ',I' r.e' _• •`•. j 4.:.';'''4'. ...;i' • q:: A•Kiri .t•• t ',\. 1 ''Ip1 w..yj t':4.':'4(,\ 4!";`•.,\. t,> "'': ., ;,r'.,Fa .•,3.
A.
40
rL-,,•-:./.
v.... 7- i 1
04 I - r'•
r `- te
4
Ne>'•••••:'••':::'.''' ` '
t. -
ti " r • 4.'..
u1-•••"'
s • _%^"^•'.--,, `
1 4l.'...7•' :',t•.,1,•L w r s
if
4 s.'. • s• .fir ti trig; ' ,;•,, • r. r
cam;(.
iiy
r,:
c',...,:.:0
q.•.,^,
y• ._:. ,
p. ,_-•'•i•i:. • .a•.?'5;••?r `ri•`+-'.• ) -1.. .v - Z,:.•,•-;-,.'.7..
SOURCE: USGS QUADRANGLES.7.5 MINUTE SERIES.SHAKOPEE.MINNESOTA 1993.CARVER COUNTY
CHANHASSEN AUAR STUDY AREA AND
CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT ARCHAEOLOGY RESULTS
CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
N
W
17.—\
E
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
NE — im Miles s FIGURE 1
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 3
2.0 METHODS
2.1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH METHODS
On May 16, 2003, prior to fieldwork, background research was conducted using the
Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) site files for information on
previously identified archaeological sites and architecture-history properties within one
mile (1.6 kilometer [km]) of the study area and on cultural resources surveys previously
conducted within the study area. In addition, researchers examined historical maps and
aerial photographs of the study area.
2.2 ARCHAEOLOGY STUDY AREA
The study area for archaeology included all areas where construction or other ground-
disturbing activities related to the project might take place. Based on construction plans
available in May of 2003, the Chanhassen AUAR study area is approximately 27,878,400
square feet (ft.) (2,589,903 square meters [m]). The total survey area for archaeology is
approximately 650 acres (263 hectares).
2.3 ARCHAEOLOGY FIELD METHODS
The project archaeologist conducted an assessment (windshield survey) of the study area
to identify areas with moderate or high archaeological potential. Such areas were defined
as the undisturbed portions of the study area:
within 500 ft. (150 m) of an existing or former water source of 40 acres (19
hectares) or greater in extent, or within 500 ft. (150 m) of a former or existing
perennial stream;
located on topographically prominent landscape features;
located within 300 ft. (100 m) of a previously reported site; or
located within 300 ft. (100 m) of a former or existing historic structure or feature
such as a building foundation or cellar depression).
In addition, archaeologists compared historical documentation, such as plat maps and
aerial photographs, with current field conditions to assess the potential within the survey
area for intact historical archaeological sites.
Areas defined as having a relatively low potential for containing intact archaeological
resources included inundated areas, former or existing wetland areas, poorly drained
areas, and areas with a 20 percent or greater slope. Low potential areas and areas in
which Holocene (less than 10,000 years old) deposits have been significantly disturbed
are defined as having little or no potential for containing intact archaeological resources.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 4
2.4 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY STUDY AREA
The study area for architecture-history took into account potential effects to historic
resources, including physical alterations to buildings, increases in levels of noise or
pollution, changes in visual or aesthetic qualities, or changes in traffic densities or
patterns. The study area for architecture-history resources comprised the entire area of
the Chanhassen AUAR, which is approximately 650 acres (263 hectares).
2.5 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY FIELD M ETHODS
During the field survey, the project historian completed an inventory of the buildings and
structures within the study area in order to identify properties that appeared to be 50 years
of age or older. Those resources were photographed and assessed for historical integrity.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 5
3.0 PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
3.1 ARCHAEOLOGY
No archaeological surveys have been previously conducted within the Chanhassen
AUAR study area.
Two reported (not field checked) archaeological sites (21 CRaj, 21 CRak) are located
within the study area for the Chanhassen AUAR (Table 1; see Figure 1). There are seven
additional previously recorded (confirmed) archaeological sites (21CR14, 21CR15,
21CR97, 21CR103, 21CR104, 21CR108, 21CR109) within a one-mile(1.6-km) radius of
the study area (Table 2).
3.2 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY
No previous surveys have been conducted within the project area, although two county-
wide surveys help to establish the historical context for architecture-history resources.
Carver County was surveyed in 1977 as part of a comprehensive county-by-county
survey of the state for all cultural resource types. This survey provided a baseline
inventory for the county's historical resources. As a follow-up to that survey, the
Minnesota Historical Society published Carver County: A Guide to Its Historic and
TABLE 1. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN STUDY AREA
Site No. Site Name T R S Sec. Description NRHP Status
21 CRaj unnamed 116N 23W 23 SE-SW-SW-SW Reported Not evaluated
mound group
21CRak unnamed 116N 23W 23 SE-SE-SE-SW Reported Not evaluated
burial
TABLE 2. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN ONE MILE OF STUDY AREA
Site No. Site Name T R S V4 Sec. Description NRHP Status
21CR14 unnamed 116N 23W 22 N-SW-SW-SW Artifact scatter Not evaluated
21CR15 unnamed 116N 23W 22 W-NE-SE-SW Lithic scatter Not evaluated
21CR97 unnamed 116N 23W 21 NW-NW-NE-SE Single flake Not evaluated
21CR103 unnamed 116N 23W 27 SE-NW-SE Lithic scatter Determined
not eligible
21CR104 unnamed 116N 23W 27 SW-NE-NE-SE Lithic scatter Not evaluated
21CR108 Lake Susan- 116N 23W 14 N-NW-NE-SE Lithic scatter Not evaluated
Riley Creek and S-SW-SE-
NE
21CR109 Lake Susan 116N 23W 14/ C-S-S-SE/ Lithic scatter Not evaluated
SW Shore 23 NE-NW-NE and possible
mound group
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 6
Prehistoric Places (Lofstrom and Spaeth n.d.). This document provides a guide "to the
landscape of the county, to its prehistoric settlers, to the European immigrants who
settled the county in the nineteenth century and to the residents of Carver County since
that time" (Lofstrom and Spaeth n.d.:i).
No properties have been previously inventoried within the study area. A total of three
farmsteads/houses have been inventoried within one mile (1.6 km) of the project area.
These farmsteads, located just north of the project area on Audubon Rd., are indicative of
the types of properties that may be considered to be significant within the study area.
Each of the farmsteads (CR-CHC-004, CR-CHC-005, and CR-CHC-006) has a house
made of Chaska brick and constructed circa 1890. Chaska brick is a locally
manufactured brick known for its cream color. The Albertine and Fred Heck House (CR-
CHC-006) is listed on the NRHP under Criterion A "as a well-preserved example of a
building constructed of Chaska brick" (Albertine and Fred Heck House NRHP
nomination, on file at the Minnesota SHPO, St. Paul). It is located adjacent to the project
area.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 7
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 ARCHAEOLOGY
The topography of the Chanhassen AUAR study area is comprised of several high ridges
and knolls surrounding the lower-lying Bluff Creek and associated wetlands. Most of
these high ridges and knolls are situated within cultivated fields or are wooded, and they
have undergone minimal or no disturbance. A few of the more elevated portions of the
study area, however, have been heavily disturbed through the previous establishment of
farmsteads, including houses, outbuildings, and graded driveways. The areas directly
adjacent to Audubon Road, Lyman Boulevard, and Pioneer Trail have been disturbed
through the construction of those roads, and an area just south of Lyman Boulevard in the
northwest portion of the project area has been disturbed by the previous construction of a
city building. In addition, a low-lying location within the southeastern portion of the
study area has been disturbed through the excavation of a sand or gravel pit, and a few of
the areas adjacent to the creek are steeply sloped and/or eroded.
In general, those portions of the study area that are steeply sloped, eroded, or heavily
disturbed are considered to have low potential for intact archaeological resources (see
Figure 1).
The remaining portions of the study area consist of locations in proximity to Bluff Creek,
to Hazeltine Lake to the west, and to wetlands connected to Lake Susan to the northeast
by a stream, most of which are topographically prominent. These portions of the study
area include the locations of two previously reported (not field checked) sites. Based,
therefore, on their overall lack of disturbance, their proximity to significant water sources
and previously reported sites, and their topographic prominence, the remaining portions
of the study area are considered to have high potential for intact precontact
archaeological resources (see Figure 1).
4.1.1 Historical Maps
Historical plat maps (Northwest Publishing Co. 1898; Hudson Map Company c. 1925) of
the study area indicate that most of the early farmsteads within the study area remain
standing. These farmsteads are addressed in the architecture-history section of this
report. Two residential buildings that are no longer extant, however, were present as
early as 1898 in the central portion of the study area, and the former Chanhassen Town
Hall had also been constructed in the northeast corner of the study area by that year
Northwest Publishing Co. 1898). Due to the apparent lack of disturbance in the
locations of these structures, these locations, which fall within areas considered to have
high potential for precontact archaeological resources, are considered to have moderate to
high potential for intact post-contact archaeological resources. The potential
significance, however, of any post-contact archaeological resources that might exist
within the study area is not known at this stage.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 8
4.2 ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY
The 106 Group inventoried eight properties within the study area that contained buildings
50 years of age or older (Figure 2; Table 3). All of the properties are associated with
farmsteads in this agricultural region. Building types include frame houses, barns, silos,
granaries, chicken houses, and other outbuildings dating to the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries. House styles include a Queen Anne, a Craftsman-style bungalow,
and American Foursquares. Photos of the properties are located in Appendix A.
Due to its proximity to Chaska, this area is known for its houses constructed of Chaska
brick, a distinctive cream-colored brick associated with the region. Three previously
recorded properties constructed in the 1890s, located just north of the project area (see
Figure 2), are examples of the use of Chaska brick. None of the properties located within
the study area utilized this building material. Most farmsteads exhibit building types
commonly constructed during the 1910s and 1920s. One exception is Property 6 (1600
Pioneer Trail), which features a Queen Anne style house, more typical of the late
nineteenth century.
None of the farmsteads retain a complete complement of agricultural outbuildings typical
of farms from this period, such as a granary, a chicken house, and other sheds. Some
only retain the original house and barn. In some cases, the historical integrity of the
primary buildings, such as the house or barn, have been significantly compromised. As a
result, the farmsteads do not sufficiently convey their association with late nineteenth-
and early twentieth-century farming practices.
Although several of the individual buildings retain good historical integrity, their styles
are typical of the period and do not appear to be significant representations of
architectural styles.
One property listed on the NRHP is located adjacent to the project area (CR-CHC-006;
the Albertine and Fred Heck House). Should the Chanhassen AUAR project involve a
federal agency in the future, this house should be considered when assessing effects to
historical properties.
2.-..,... -... _ .•,. awi....---,,--.::.w __:. •
az-• .... -
Project Area {1, f
f11-
0e;; • !
oF., ', .`; :s A::111..7.,7 3. ';•;,
r .• R, • 'IV r 43 _ :; '.,, .,f
r a , •-,.);..Y. •'',.•
I•
5.:!' ,'
s'
S. _ -
r
r.:'__,i -sir ;• F_
r•. - t Ir' !
I.
i-1 'L'..
4 i'i
A..,,: • :{R S'!,tl I f-,..1151. 1. ' li
z,, (•
I'. __ Y.: -_AFF• r • Q •• ..•. •:..•,'..,;. L 1:
37--,',.1,+
I'a: r: ;1i: ) !l:4:, ;1•t,(;!Llgl, - .
r '
t L-I ,. ., Low 1_,.14:
etr'a,1 a"
f .ti_
v_. +•
1
wi;:
1 •'.•
1II•
r
iF
ti1'
I•t - 1'
I
5 1z 3•..' n _:•• .., R;
i"-"r.. -••'r •,.-i.
t'y 1. .te
a i J•1 .•_ "•',.7.'
4
I i.•.
i:'i.' _ - --,.......,..,.\...:.....',r
a'"•._i'/1'1 ' If•I :,'+ \••,+`
h'.:,+' '. 1.....0..4:., j'.4,•:11
4•` =
1 ':,
Y. J;.,. .ori,}'
Tr;
i'•-•J-:\
i I
t ^,\'.:._.
J,,-- ' '
t •••••'_•" '
h } `f :•;,- '''' •
ry°t :
1 15 _.4 i......„y .•, ,.:.',p,_
t, . ' r
JI'
5Ai§ • , ' I.•', , I N.:•.
Y;•+`.
k s
11.a3. 1
r,.i:• `'• '
r.,
y<1Z'ow\ 'r.y.`' I•`v...1`,•1 'I';+.•:r1'
y,{
II
HC:.,6• ''xs't31.•; .f ..Y.. ?_„.
J ::
j: 'c-... . .....-
LtWAir 1:.
1. •,% •i l''`-,
1%' I' \411:.2: !. J/ .,
i: J .' — V ..
s_•tt•. r,
5 \'
I 5 i• 1,1 r: ';% r.'=:' . .:,, j
Win'/
tom' 1 4_ .(4C,..,-,:-..:- '
isra:K' .•, ? {• .
s,
I , P Listed),:"17'....-:-' I
J rt '
1•:
1F`` • t_ f ?.\\.J.:• 'v+' _ - ,' i,Irf, s
y'[ I..---.
2.....'_,...
4,4.0
I
T • -'
L. •••
g—
r Prope 5' .:1:. ;;;orf i r..I ,5 ,''•_ ;r, ` ' 6i,:,..-..;-....?"
i ,
I 9i s:, Ibr'%._!:1.—.-,:;.1,..t254 .r z.,,. Y
1
S '_
JJ',
Ir`r
J,,.•
1'.. _
f i J.
ti '1'x'7,- " f:- ...N.....)` N'• ..ij'. .>.:f:•l,,::
171:. ty_ 0."...•-••\ -^"'-:• •
ti•/ '.F: ',...ter. }I.'••,
4y r Brl
r; t,- =•I1 _
r. r,
I,,'1.f% ''••1
J J• ^
tUyE r •' 1 f :
Y-
7- .c '1. -i • rl
Sr' ts•' 0 `,'., • ..J• '.,r/,',
1).A&:" M
1 .,.._tih•_ n..,.. 1
6'i..,
i •c
r( y
r'
i"'•'• 5r•
551.•
r• 1
Q•4• _ 1 O `'
W.',U''
t711',fi•01,se•,•({ PVJ I l4?: -.`Qi'.'_.•...i
i 1•'•_x •- *' i:IrYw• .. .::i b i1.''4 -.• .: ..: ,t •\ _• I •7't>'..IL
r• _ ••'
r'
ri^rtL '••
H`ti, .,{,+- 5, ((
I' \\
J v;i- I.•- •'^ ,,+ ''r;' 'f-; •-•;-:.,!:-;_ •e—s"
I'• _.•_r. ,`. ':_:ti- .
4....,./".,,,, w R' r•'{ 1 'L Vf I, •'J i K-_ •. ••,::+ "`fit "•••4"7:7.err'_
i4 :..Q }.i 4 ,I p)1
5' •'• ''. .: .
4.,„.11,... :; i.r-,.::, .' :ys%.".'''-
a0y^ti• :414. x\.l i.47,rr r: ";JJ `t:.'-::' 5.':• :'`r:+.
w.%.
1
55^r,
1-.;,,,:..
4 '' f
f f, sf. .''A.•i•,.; U ! ydll-, -,,.•''•s. r-'• .•tr-.r.y '`.
J.` •:
1`;
2_ I +, `f j` , (,""'
I
11.•. ,r•1.' •,,; ;\., ,7
ti.s. - _ A
r,.
J
1
I kt
n.
i('5 •,•:,,.6.,7_....•,-..,,,,,-......%6.',7_.,,n.-A ,t'iwi :w.,• N,. _f'j:•1 :.,.• `,, - 4%•:';.'7,7'.:e..,,''4-•,'4'ra. I,• •,•• '
4 149r5'•,t 5 W :,JL. .
57 ._y • 7:2 !, _ t '-M1
fi • • -•'• '' •Ty....,. ..
4- _
Gh"
G:°:,.,1 °s Y_!-_''
X14:.4.;.`•-:' o•' `.• ..u 4.1•l.4..ext4 % •a ';');.•:•'•.`: "..'.....,..:- ;. „;q S`J:' •.? I• a-k i
1,• :,.'''.„-:..
k.:/•.';. •.
t V' moi AO. \-• ,1114'14_L"a:.•'+,':iY('!•'
r .•")*,. ,.,:•:: • --:
1-:;? rt ,&''I .fJ''. •_r, .
11 _ ,'
i
31,•• . ;
rk l'-'' ''::
7%... .-.
s ,-
I - '• : "y Ie'l.r!.,l`:
F,
t °'
r ld •"
7"0 rT
1 !r - •%•'--.
P,..;'-
l J yC'i.--1: ,11 , 1..• .-...,;••74.:.;''.', ,, t 0'
w, ,y . " ":4.,. 1
rJ
f.
k'. r t.
J •;
J,, ...2....;;;
4744;'
r ^44; ''••19•• .','.. ..P.•.• /roti:,1''`
114"1: R,
4
k• .t... ::• -,'- 6 J"•'l:.ryes- • --M''`, • 1 • 4y, -•'y.:.
rif."''atl•::?L}`' =IF: . _ 'y+.
C'( • -- 'da!F:' ri
511,;•:.-;;;)',.':•"'' 1 ,•'' Aft,is 15. "- 74• %•:'''• ''':i4;: '
1:3'%017•2c-...7.7'_ _
lr.
L ._• aTi' : .
y''
SJ•
l '_:.
9•d•.:::":
7.--,
SD_.. j a.••• 1.,:,;. _•rsi r`%..1,4'.,.'•••':"L..,.-
r'd--.•^T=`:. _•
a _ :"
1 r ' 7-f?•_ . ....=7.+.Zer"'7, ,fab f.
ir° •,
y r,.;
H
c
v, 4. w N C reoaw
xY
n
x
H
N N nJoI-.
O
Y a a.> a 7d
arri
0 o c
a
xeD
Z o 0 0 y `"
0Cr
0 O 0PZJ 0-3
a a
99--
K
b
O
v
ri
z7 ny
0
w, v
7d
Crl
CA
co eD T
o. a0
PD 0-
0
C,
0o o00
AD LA E.
g0
O :'
rt
w o ,.
o g ed
CD
t
C.bC era
and
C n
0 CD y
o
as
Ccn
p p n p o y
o-... Y..
K
r.. N O 00mco
O 0 0
e9
w
O0 0- H rig m a. m o H w 7' o H O -4. 5• H a• ,H r. .0 E. Cr H
C . 0 A7 ryq
0 •;' a a rry a y qq
CD N P N a* a CD 5, N
b C .
CD
M
c, '
y '7
ric,
rD '. p a. P O M " 0' rD 5 —, o ..gy
C3 ry o •-•-• so o•
O
O •- rD `„ co ;a m `< es o G. E. _ ciu G v_,H
C `<`C 0
CD • a o m m io P.'.cm el = a m o ry a, fa. - `< a
w a o o v o' er o p C p
Hq
m ao
cn c ry a °' y
o w
cn
o oo' Q- moo °
1'4 En c. o avo o as a. °'' o a y "0'
o b „. '- p z •a C o `
moo °
Q O--{{ `° Q o p •
C C3 CD p v' a.OQ p N ry• 2 a ry O n -. P .. o N
a ..• O
a N eD O ep p. O . n ry G .+ n dq S.••'
eQ'
i G R AapC ,-O IR G G m p p b4 A m P. o M Oct s p Fa• :,•• P Tl
a o • 0 5'• °o °p m °# o • a" •-,.,. w °e o ,,; o o o „ crew aro C n
o
cm °
p w ° G• m d"" fD ;;
oo
o C Cr a• a
a a "7 G
0
p
Crc, cr.s CD o a, 2 m aero 9 -'•cm ti N n ¢ ,°, N
a 0- o D 0- 0' v
es
4
go C
N a a a
a DA '" cE.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 11
TABLE 3. ARCHITECTURE-HISTORY PROPERTIES
Field Address Property Building Types Date Description/Integrity
Number Type Estimate)
6 1600 Pioneer Trail Farmstead House,Granary/Corncrib, c. 1890 The two-story house features massing and
Silos,Corncrib,Trailer detailing of the Queen Anne style.
Offices,Spring House(?) Although some alterations have been made,
it retains good integrity despite its
dilapidated state. Other outbuildings,such
as the garage,chicken house,granary,and
corncrib retain good-to-fair integrity but are
also dilapidated. The original barn has been
demolished,with only the foundation and
two adjacent silos remaining. A concrete
block structure is believed to have been a
springhouse. Modern trailer offices have
been added to the site. The farmstead as a
whole does not retain integrity.
7 1500 Pioneer Trail Farmstead House,Quonset Barn,Pole c. 1910 The foursquare house has been clad with
Barns,Butler Bins, aluminum siding and has had other
Harvestore alterations,resulting in poor integrity. The
original barn appears to have been replaced
with the addition of a Quonset shed on the
original foundations. Other metal pole
barns,Butler bins,Harvestore silo have
been added to the farmstead,resulting in
poor overall historical integrity.
1370 Pioneer Trail Farmstead House,Dairy Barn, c. 1910 The foursquare house has wooden
Granary, Pole Barn clapboard siding and retains good integrity.
The gambrel-roof dairy barn has board and
batten siding and retains good integrity.
Other buildings include a partially
demolished granary and a metal pole barn.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Page 12
REFERENCES CITED
Hudson Map Company
c. 1925 Plat Book of Carver County, Minnesota. Hudson Map Company,
Minneapolis.
Lofstrom, T. and L. V. Spaeth
n.d. Carver County: A Guide to Its Historic Places and Prehistoric Places.
Minnesota Historical Society.
Northwest Publishing Co.
1898 Plat Book of Carver County, Minnesota. Northwest Publishing Co.,
Minneapolis.
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
APPENDIX A
PHOTOGRAPHS
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Property 1, House
wr i
Property 1, Barn
e;•
Property 1, Granary
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Property 2, House
4
Property 2, Barn
111111111
Property 2, Granary/Corncrib
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
T
QTR #I
Property 3, House
i j
Property 4, House
jj1
f
fik
Property 4, Barn
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
1Ar ii, .
1
p.
fala* .4. ••-• Vt.*,...
1 PI 410110,1% *
Ili**
4 •
w,_ w
joimri..at
is
94.
3
Property 5, House
lcit rr
1 •. • i
him_"2.--
if.....
Property 5,Barn/House
Chanhassen ALJAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
u
V,-, ,
ti-`
r-ate. 4
1
i.i
r '
Property 6, House
iaL , •.
4fR•
tr .
1
y t-,..1 S
1
yrs +t i
4
M
iNii i 7
f_.
Property 6, Granary/Corncrib
4 ,
ip.
w
Property 6, Corncrib
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
Mil
t5
HII IM' '
I.
r._._...04,11..04,11 t.
Property 7,House
i4111110,
iir
A.
1
Ko_ 4
Ykra
Property 7, Barn
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
ao4- • .1 l_
II,
t z....4 t i
N 11 1lRp
Property 8, House
r
i i.5
t I I*
Property 8,Barn
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
APPENDIX B
LIST OF PERSONNEL
Chanhassen AUAR
Cultural Resources Assessment
LIST OF PERSONNEL
Project Manager Anne Ketz, M.A., RPA
Principal Investigators
Archaeology Andrea C. Vermeer, M.A., RPA
Architecture-History William E. Stark, M.A.
Graphics Matt Schillerberg
t
r
Avienda Development Project
Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
of the Level 7 Development/Landform
Avienda" Development Project,
Carver County, Minnesota
PREPARED BY
Merjent, Inc.
800 Washington Avenue North, Suite 315
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
Dean T. Sather, M.A., R.P.A, Principal Investigator
Under Contract to
Level 7 Development
November 2016
rerjent
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK AND METHODOLOGY 2
3.1 SCOPE OF WORK 2
3.2 METHODOLOGY 2
4.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATIONS 3
4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND 3
4.2 PRE-CONTACT OVERVIEW 3
4.2.1 Early Paleo-Indian Period (11200 to 10500 BC) 4
4.2.2 Late Paleo-Indian/ Early Eastern Archaic (10500 to 7500 BC) 4
4.2.3 Middle Archaic (7500 to 3000 BC) 4
4.2.4 Late Archaic (3000 to 500 BC) 5
4.2.5 Woodland: Initial, Terminal (500 BC to AD 1200) 5
4.2.6 Oneota Tradition (AD 1200 to 1650) 6
4.3 CONTACT AND POST-CONTACT OVERVIEW 7
4.3.1 Contact Period (1650 to 1837 CE) 7
4.3.2 Eastern Dakota 7
4.3.3 British 7
4.3.4 Initial United States 7
4.3.5 Post-contact Period (1837 to 1960 CE) 7
4.3.6 Early Agriculture & River Settlement(1840 to 1870) 8
4.3.7 Railroads & Agricultural Development (1870 to 1940) 8
4.4 BACKGROUND LITERATURE REVIEW 9
4.4.1 Previously Identified Archaeological Sites 9
4.4.2 Previously Recorded Standing Historic Structures 10
5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 11
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 12
7.0 REFERENCES CITED 13
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1:TOWNSHIP, RANGE,AND SECTION OF LANDS INCLUDED IN AVIENDA PROJECT 2
TABLE 2: PRE-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERIODS IN SOUTHERN MINNESOTA 3
TABLE 3: PREVIOUSLY DOCUMENTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN ONE-MILE OF THE PROJECT9
TABLE 4: PREVIOUSLY RECORDED HISTORIC/ARCHITECTURAL SITES WITHIN ONE-MILE OF THE
PROJECT AREA 10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Avienda Project Area —Topographic Overview
Figure 2 Avienda Project Area —Survey Coverage
Figure 3 21 CRaj Site Map
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In October of 2016 Merjent, Inc. (Merjent) conducted a Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance
Survey of the route for the Level 7 Development/Landform "Avienda" development Project
Project). The archaeological survey consisted of the pedestrian and subsurface archaeological
investigation of an approximately 113 acre parcel of land located within the City of
Chanhassen, Minnesota, proposed to be developed for commercial use. During the field survey
Merjent relocated and delineated one previously documented site. No previously
undocumented archaeological sites were identified.
1
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Level 7 Development is proposing to develop the "Avienda" commercial center in
Chanhassen, Minnesota. The proposed Project is located on approximately 113 acres of land
located on previously undeveloped agricultural fields (Figure 1). A Phase I Archaeological
Reconnaissance Survey of the Project was conducted due to the presence of previously
documented cultural resource sites within and near the perimeter of the defined Project
boundary, in compliance with the Minnesota Field Archaeology Act (MN 138.31-42). Merjent
was contacted in October of 2016 by Landform to conduct the Phase I Archaeological
Reconnaissance Survey.
Project activities will occur in the legal locations shown in Table 1, which served as the
basis for the Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey area.
Table 1: Township, Range, and Section of Lands Included in Avienda Project
County Township Range Sections
Carver 116N 23W NE 23
Between October 24th and October 26th, 2016, Merjent cultural resource staff conducted
a Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Project. The Phase I Archaeological
Reconnaissance Survey relocated and delineated one previously documented archaeological
site.
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 SCOPE OF WORK
The Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey was conducted to determine if
archaeological resources were present within the Project's Area of Potential Effect (APE). The
APE for this segment included all surface and subsurface locations that would potentially
experience direct physical disturbance as a result of the construction within the defined Project
area segment (Figure 2). Subsurface testing was limited to the wooded area in the
southwestern portion of the Project area.
3.2 METHODOLOGY
Field investigations for the current Phase I Survey were conducted according to
guidelines prepared by the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (Anfinson, 2005). A
literature review was conducted to determine the scope and results of previous archaeological
and historic property inventories conducted in the region. Data files maintained by both the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA)
provided information regarding recorded cultural resources and previous survey activities within
the Project area. Previously published synthesis reports provided a majority of the background
information regarding regional cultural contexts and environmental history. The environmental
background and historic contexts were examined to assess the probability of sites and what
types of sites might be identified.
Field investigations executed during a Phase I Archaeological Reconnaissance provide
a means of determining if cultural deposits exist within a defined Project area and to assess the
vertical and horizontal boundaries of any discovered deposits. Investigative techniques for
Phase I survey may include pedestrian survey, shovel testing, and deep testing.
2
Pedestrian survey consists of controlled visual inspection of the ground surface. Visual
inspection is conducted on ground surfaces exhibiting exposed soils such as cultivated fields.
Field personnel conducting pedestrian surveys are spaced 5 meters (m) apart and traverse the
field in parallel transects inspecting the exposed surface for evidence of cultural deposits.
Positive findings consist of historic or prehistoric artifact concentrations and/or evidence of
larger, intact cultural features such as structural remains or earthworks. Generally, pedestrian
survey is not recommended for areas where surface visibility is less than 25 percent.
Shovel testing, when required, consists of a hand dug excavation unit between 30 and
40 centimeters (cm) in diameter at 15 meter intervals. The depth of the excavated shovel test
varies, depending on the depth of subsurface deposits and the presence or absence of intact
cultural material. Shovel tests are generally excavated to a depth where intact subsoil horizons
are exposed. In locations where subsurface deposits extend beyond the capabilities of hand
excavated shovel tests, deep testing may be conducted. All materials excavated from shovel
tests or deep tests are screened through one-quarter inch hardware mesh. Detailed field notes
are recorded during field investigations for both positive and negative results.
With regard to potentially deeply buried sites, a desktop review is first conducted to
identify the landforms and soils present in a Project area. If there is the potential for deeply
buried living surfaces that might contain archaeological materials, field testing such as auger
coring or mechanical trenching is done.
4.0 RESULTS OF INVESTIGATIONS
4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND
The Project is located in the Eastern Broadleaf Forest ecological province of central
Minnesota. Historic vegetation in the area consisted of oak woodland and maple-basswood
forests. Large game animals were dominated by white-tailed deer, while small game resources
were also abundant. The environmental survey corridor traverses Minnesota State Historic
Preservation Office ("SHPO") sub-region Central Lakes Deciduous South, 4S. The following
discussion of pre-contact archaeological periods follows Gibbon 2012 unless otherwise noted.
4.2 PRE-CONTACT OVERVIEW
Pre-contact cultural traditions and development are defined primarily by the material
culture present at a site and the subsistence patterns being utilized at that time. Material culture
includes artifacts and features, and subsistence patterns include hunting/gathering and
horticulture. Further, within pre-contact periods there are often subdivisions based on
geographical location, projectile point typologies, and ceramic typologies. Gibbon divides
Pre-contact cultures in southern Minnesota into six cultural periods as shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Pre-Contact Archaeological Periods in Southern Minnesota
Periods Year
Early Paleo-Indian 11200 to 10500 BC
Late Paleo-Indian/Early Eastern Archaic 10500 to 7500 BC
Middle Archaic 7500 to 3000 BC
Late Archaic 3000 to 500 BC
Woodland: Initial, Terminal 500 BC to AD 1200
Oneota Tradition AD 1200 to AD 1650
3
4.2.1 Early Paleo-Indian Period (11200 to 10500 BC)
Paleo-Indians were likely the first people to populate the North American continent.
Communities were comprised of small bands of highly nomadic hunter-gathers, primarily
focused on the exploitation of mega-fauna, including mammoths and mastodons. Paleo-Indian
sites tend to be small and are commonly identified by the recovery of large, distinctive
lanceolate projectile points.
4.2.2 Late Paleo-Indian/ Early Eastern Archaic (10500 to 7500 BC)
The transition from the Early Paleo-Indian to Late Paleo-Indian in the central Minnesota
is evidenced in the archaeological record by the replacement of fluted points with stemmed
points and some heavy stone tool construction. Tool types of Late Paleo-Indian/Early Eastern
Archaic peoples occur in much greater numbers than those of their predecessors, the Early
Paleo-Indians. Tool characteristic of this period show a high quality of workmanship and include
projectile points with a lanceolate shape, lack of fluting, ground and thin edges, and fine oblique
or collateral flaking across the blade face. Types of Late Paleo-Indians identified in Minnesota
include Agate Basin, Alberta, Angostura, Browns Valley, Eden, Frederick, Hell Gap, Midland,
Plainview, and Scottsbluff.
Early Eastern Archaic points are notched or stemmed forms, often constructed of heavily
reworked lanceolate points with a concave base, basal ears, and fluting on some specimens.
Although the point types differ from those of Late Paleo-Indians, the Early Eastern Archaic was
contemporary in part with the Late Paleo-Indian period, sharing a nomadic, animal hunting
lifeway.
The majority of identified Late Paleo-Indian Sites in Minnesota occur along lake edges
and rivers, with most lake edge sites located along smaller, non-glacial lakes. Sites identified
from this period are typically find spots of points, lithic workshops, and temporary camps. Longtermhabitationsites, burial locations, and kill sites are rare and underrepresented in the
archaeological record.
4.2.3 Middle Archaic(7500 to 3000 BC)
Middle Archaic projectile points typically are smaller and less well made than during the
preceding phases and suggest a general decline in high quality stone working outside of the
Paleo-Indian tradition. Characteristics of Archaic points that separate themselves from
Paleo-Indian projectile points include smaller size and beveled and resharpened edges
designed for cutting and penetration. An expansion of tool technology begins to appear during
the late Middle Archaic with a new suite of ground stone tools including banner stones,
plummets, and grooved axes. The utilization of copper artifacts also appears for the first time.
Known Middle Archaic sites in central Minnesota remain sparse, typically consisting of
surface scatters of stone artifacts in small, shallow components with minimal midden buildup.
Site types include short term camps, kill sites, lithic workshops, quarries, and burials. The
features and minimal number of artifacts suggest a small population of highly mobile hunters
and foragers with single use to short term habitation sites.
4
4.2.4 Late Archaic (3000 to 500 BC)
The expansion of tool technology that starts to appear in the Middle Archaic period
flourishes in the Late Archaic. New sets of side stemmed and side-notched projectile points,
ground stone tools, and the first clearly identifiable fishing implements in the archaeological
record of Minnesota originate in the Late Archaic. Utilization of raw materials like native copper
and marine shell and creation of unusual artifacts like birdstones, gorgets, and Turkey Tail
bifaces are defining characteristics of the period, as well as communal burial sites and the
continuing absence of pottery from the archaeological record.
Late Archaic sites in Minnesota are mostly characterized by the presence of hammered
copper artifacts, as well as ground and polished stone artifacts. The lithic tool assemblage
located at the Fish Lake West site near Duluth consists mostly of choppers, adzes, and bifaces;
tools adapted to working in an environment dominated by timber. The lithic styles and
hammered copper artifacts found at the Fish Lake West site are also present in Late Archaic
sites farther south at sites such as the Petaga Point site near Lake Mille Lacs.
4.2.5 Woodland: Initial, Terminal (500 BC to AD 1200)
Gibbon (2012) separates the archaeological record of Initial Woodland period in South
Eastern Minnesota (a resource region that coincides with the portion of the state located south
and east of the City of Saint Cloud) into three periods: the Early Woodland (500 to 200 BC),
Middle Woodland (200 BC to AD 200), and Late Middle Woodland (AD 200 to 500).
Pottery remains are the most representative artifacts from the Initial Woodland tradition.
Pottery styles from the period are usually typified by a thick walled jar with cordage markings on
both the exterior and interior faces of the pottery. The construction and shape of the pottery
typically consist of strait rims, slightly constricted necks, somewhat rounded shoulders, and
subconoidal bottoms resembling varieties of pottery from the Havana-Hopewell complexes in
Illinois. Lithic assemblages show continuity with earlier Archaic and Woodland assemblages
typical of highly mobile groups of hunters and foragers. The greatest artifact concentration in the
region appears in the rivers, lakes, wetlands, and wet prairies of southern Minnesota. In addition
to the presence of pottery in the archaeological record, Woodland sites from this period are also
exemplified by the presence of conical shaped burial mounds (Gibbon 2012). By the Late
Middle Woodland phase of the Initial Woodland tradition, cultural practices of the Late Middle
Woodland people seem less elaborate than during the previous phases. Burial mounds became
simpler, often lacking diagnostic grave goods. Pottery styles at this later stage are described by
more globular bodies, thinner walls, and finer temper with more complex rim profiles.
The transformation from Initial Woodland complexes to Terminal Woodland complexes
after AD 500 remains poorly understood (Gibbon, 2012). What is clear is that the Terminal
Woodland period represents a time of technological and cultural change. The bow and arrow
replaced the atlatl, earlier pottery traits disappeared, and elaborate mortuary rituals associated
with large earthwork construction began. Long distance acquisition of materials, ritual pipe
smoking, and possibly the presence of socially ranked societies were descriptive of cultures with
a great reliance on domesticated plants and larger populations within groups.
Known Late Woodland sites, while evident in some areas of southwestern Wisconsin
and eastern Iowa, are sparse in southeastern Minnesota. One reason may be that the lack of
real sites as large scale surveys in the region have failed to identify a strong Late Woodland
presence, suggesting a population density much lower than those areas farther south and east
5
Gibbon 2012). Because of sparse number of Late Woodland sites in the region, examples must
be borrowed from the surrounding states of Iowa and Wisconsin. Initial Late Woodland (AD 500
to 700) in southwestern Wisconsin and northeastern Iowa consist of components most
recognized by the presence of Lane Farm Cord-Impressed pottery, a jar with a somewhat
rounded base and constricted neck. The small and corner notched projectile points of the period
may represent the first arrow head points in the region. Small conical and elongated linear
mounds containing limited grave goods and primary flexed burials are evident.
Defined by Gibbon (2012) as the Mature Late (Terminal) Woodland period in the Upper
Mississippi River Valley, AD 700 to 1000 represents the time period defined by the Effigy Mound
Complex. Effigy Mound people constructed earthen conical and linear mounds similar to
previous cultural phases as well as mounds designed in the shape of wildlife, including avian,
mammalian, and reptile. Grave goods are typically utilitarian objects such as ceramic vessels
and projectile points. Material culture of the Effigy culture includes the near absence on non-
utilitarian "luxury" items intended for the elite, simple unnotched triangular points, thinner and
finer tempered ceramics with more complex shapes, and a shared cultural identity that covered
a large geographic region for over 600 years.
Mound building would disappear from the archaeological record during the Final Late
Terminal) Woodland period from AD 100 to 1200. Pure Late Woodland sites become rare and
are replaced with stockade sites exhibiting both Late Woodland and Middle Mississippian
characteristics. Ceramics from this period belong to the Grant Series with design features
including grit tempering, cord roughened jars that may have squared orifices, prominent
castellations, and special rim treatment that raises the height of the rim. Decorations, when
present, generally consist of single cord impressions forming zigzag and chevrons over plain or
cord roughened rim surfaces. Lithic technology from this period includes simple unnotched
Maddison triangular arrow points and Cahokia Site Notched cluster points.
4.2.6 Oneota Tradition (AD 1200 to 1650)
The transition from the Woodland-dominated cultural landscape to the Upper
Mississippian contexts in southern Minnesota saw a shift from long established lifeways of
Woodland peoples to the appearance of societies with new material cultures, settlement
patterns, social organization, and ideology. Groups of people were less mobile and more
dependent on the cultivation of maize, living within more permanent and often fortified
settlements. The construction and artistic techniques used to produce ceramics evolved to
vessels with shoulder decorated rims, smoothed rather than cordmarked exterior surfaces, shell
temper rather than grit temper, and handles in place of collars or castellations.
Oneota Sites are distributed throughout the forests and prairie of southern Minnesota
with regional variations of Oneota pottery identified in the northeastern prairie region and in the
north woods. Oneota village sites are located along several rivers within southern Minnesota,
specifically the Mississippi River near Red Wing, along the St. Croix north of Stillwater, the Blue
Earth River and along the Upper Minnesota River. Oneota Pottery is also present in the upper
layer of many sites as far west as the South Dakota border. Ceramics are shell tempered, round
bottomed globular jars with high straight to slightly curving rims ranging in size from 0.5 to 5
gallons. Stone tools identified at Oneota village sites consist of unnotched triangular points,
scrapers, knives, drills, wedges, choppers, and expedient flake tools.
6
4.3 CONTACT AND POST-CONTACT OVERVIEW
4.3.1 Contact Period (1650 to 1837 CE)
The Contact Period (1650 to 1837) includes American Indian and Euro-American
contexts. The Minnesota OSA (MN OSA) subdivides the American Indian context into
Indeterminate" or "Eastern Dakota", and the Euro-American context into "Indeterminate",
French", "British", and "Initial US" (MN OSA, 2009).
4.3.2 Eastern Dakota
The Eastern Dakota, along with the Western Dakota and the Lakota, comprise the ethnic
group of the Sioux people. The Eastern Dakota lived in "village-centered tribal world societies"
throughout Minnesota during the 17th century and were in an alliance with French fur traders
and merchants (Gibbon, 2012). The Dakota War of 1862 resulted in numerous attacks on
settlements and trading posts along the Minnesota River and culminated in the mass hanging of38EasternDakota (MNHS, 2015). After the war, many families relocated to the western
territories and Canada. There are currently four reservations in Minnesota inhabited by
descendants of the Eastern Dakota people.
4.3.3 British
After the Treaty of Paris in 1763, the British quickly set up fur trading posts throughout
Minnesota. The British fur trading economy was centered at Grand Portage, where traders
would bring their furs and leave with other valuable trade goods. After the Revolutionary War of
1776, competition between the United States and British companies intensified throughout
Minnesota. In 1803, the Louisiana land purchase established United States lands extending
from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains. The War of 1812 saw a demise in the British fur
traders due to the United States denying business licenses to British traders.
4.3.4 Initial United States
Early Americans conducted the first fully documented land survey of Minnesota in the
mid-18th century and early 19th century. Jonathan Carver explored the upper Mississippi River
in the 1760s, and by 1806 Zebulon Pike had explored portions of the river. Missionaries began
to arrive in the early 19th century, primarily along the Minnesota River. The American Fur
Company was founded by John Jacob Astor in 1811, after which numerous fur trading posts
were quickly established throughout the state. At the confluence of the Minnesota and
Mississippi Rivers, Fort Snelling was constructed in 1819 to protect the new United States
investments in the area. Large-scale fur trade resulted in a major decline in native beaver
populations, and by 1842 the fur trade in Minnesota had come to an end (Dobbs, 1989). After
the passing of the fur trading industry, land was opened up to Euro-American settlers.
4.3.5 Post-contact Period (1837 to 1960 CE)
MN OSA subdivides the post-contact period into eight categories based on social and
economic issues pertaining to different geographical locations and time frames (MN OSA,
2009):
Indian Communities & Reservations (1837 to 1934)
Early Agriculture & River Settlement (1840 to 1870)
Northern MN Lumbering (1870 to 1930s)
7
Tourism & Recreation (1870 to 1945)
St. Croix Triangle Lumbering (1830s to 1900s)
Railroads & Agricultural Development (1870 to 1940)
Iron Ore Industry (1880s to 1945)
Urban Centers (1870 to 1940)
Additionally, Euro-American Farms in Minnesota (1820 to 1960) have been divided into
eight development periods (Terrell, 2006):
Early Settlement (1820 to 1870)
Development of a Wheat Monoculture (1860 to 1885)
Diversification and the Rise of Dairying (1875 to 1900)
Industrialization and Prosperity (1900 to 1920)
Developing the Cutover (1900 to 1940)
Development of Livestock Industries (1900 to 1940)
Depression and the Interwar Period (1920 to 1940)
World War II and the Postwar Period (1940 to 1960)
4.3.6 Early Agriculture & River Settlement (1840 to 1870)
This category is defined by subsistence farming and the transition to wheat monoculture.
It is primarily focused on the southeastern portion of the state. Farmsteads within this context
are represented by farm buildings and other types of structures, such as, dugouts, soddies, and
claim shacks" (Terrell, 2006). The Preemption Act of 1854 and the Homestead Act of 1862
brought many settlers to Minnesota and the railroads quickly followed. Many towns arose along
major transportation routes and along important rivers. The large influx of settlers created ethnic
communities that were centered on churches and schools. As the farms and towns grew, so did
industries associated with agricultural activities (Terrell, 2006). This, in turn, gave rise to the
next historical context: Railroads & Agricultural Development.
4.3.7 Railroads &Agricultural Development(1870 to 1940)
This category is characterized by larger and more diverse farms, primarily in the
southern and western portions of the state. Farmsteads within this context also include
subsistence farming and large scale bonanza farms (Terrell, 2006). As the earlier, smaller
communities continued to grow, railroads were expanding to accommodate full-scale
agricultural commerce. Towns located along railroad lines quickly became important to the local
economies for the ease of transporting agricultural goods, as well as bringing in needed goods
for the local populations. As the modern industrial era continued to expand and change, so did
the local historical landscapes of the railroad towns. Urban sprawl, along with new technologies,
industries, and railroads all led to changes within these communities that can still be seen todayTerrell, 2006).
8
4.4 BACKGROUND LITERATURE REVIEW
In October 2016, Merjent Senior Cultural Resource Specialist Dean T. Sather examined
site files maintained at the OSA and the SHPO in St. Paul to update and supplement the Phase
IA Background Literature Review conducted the previous year. The objective in reviewing
cultural resources background literature is to identify previously recorded cultural resource sites
and assess the potential for unrecorded sites to be located within the Project Area. The
standard for considering a cultural property significant is whether it meets the criteria for listing
on the NRHP. The initial criterion for such listing is an age of 50 or more years. Beyond age, a
property must retain integrity and be associated with significant historic trends, historic persons,
building styles and craftsmanship, or the property must have the potential to provide significant
information about the past. Merjent staff inventoried previously executed cultural resource
investigations for the townships included in the Project area and the greater Carver County
region.
A total of 8 previously documented archaeological site and two inventoried standing
structures were located within one-mile of the Project.
4.4.1 Previously Identified Archaeological Sites
Prior to conducting archaeological field investigations for the Project, Merjent retrieved
information from the Minnesota Historical Society (MNHS) regarding previously documented
archaeological site locations within a 1-mile-wide (1.6 km) study area including and surrounding
the Project area. Merjent's review of the information obtained at MNHS identified seven
previously reported archaeological sites within one mile (mi) (1.6 kilometers [km]) of the
proposed Project area and one archaeological sites within the Project Area (Figure 1, Table 3).
Table 3: Previously Documented Archaeological Sites
within One-Mile of the Project
Site Number/Site Name/Site County, Location Site Location to Project Area
Type TRS) Significance
21CR 014/unnamed/Pre- Carver, Unevaluated
West of Project—external
contact artifact scatter 116N/23W/22 to Project boundary
21CR 015/unnamed/Pre- Carver, Unevaluated
West of Project—external
contact Lithic Scatter 116N/23W/22 to Project boundary
South and West of Project
21CR 103/unnamed/Pre- Carver,Unevaluated external to Project
contact Lithic Scatter 116N/23W/27 boundary
South and West of Project
21CR 104/unnamed/Pre- Carver,Unevaluated external to Project
contact Lithic Scatter 116N/23W/27 boundary
North and East of Project—
21 CR 109/Lake Susan SW Cass,
Shore/Pre-contact Lithic Scatter 116N/32W/14
Unevaluated external to Project
boundary
South and West of Project
21CR 140/unnamed/Historic Cass,
artifactUnknown
external to Project
scatter 116N/23W/27 boundary
9
21CR aj/unnamed/Pre-contact Cass, Unknown Within Project
mounds 116N/23W/23
21CR aj/unnamed/Historic Cass, East of Project—external to
Burial 116N/23W/23
Unknown
Project Boundary
As mentioned above, seven of the sites were located within the one-mile buffer
surrounding the boundary of the Project Area (21CR014, 21CR015, 21CR103, 21CR104,
21CR109, 21CR140, and 21 CRak). As these sites are situated external to the boundary of the
proposed Project area, they will not be impacted by proposed construction activities associated
with the Project. The remaining site, 21 CRaj, is an informant documented pre-contact burial site
comprised of two low conical mounds situated in a wooded area in the southern portion of the
Project Area (Figure 1 & 3). These features were relocated and delineated during field
investigations. Physical testing of the features was not undertaken at the time of the field
survey as the current development plans indicate that this area will be maintained as green
space and no construction activities will be occurring in this area. Therefore, while located
within the proposed Project Area site 21 CRaj is situated external to construction area and will
not be impacted by proposed construction activities.
4.4.2 Previously Recorded Standing Historic Structures
A review of records at the MN SHPO indicated that no historic/architectural resources
have been previously inventoried in the Project boundary. Two historic/architectural resources
have been previously inventoried within one-mile of the Project area (Figure 1). One of these
resources has been listed on the NRHP. The other resource has not been evaluated. The list of
previously documented historic/architectural resources is summarized in Table 4.
Table 4: Previously Recorded Historic/Architectural Sites
within One-Mile of the Project Area
Site Number/Site Site Location to Project
Name/Site Type County, Location (TRS)
Significance Area
North and East of Project
CR-CHC-004/Farmstead Cass, 116N/23W/22 Unevaluated —External to Project
boundary- No Impact
CR-CHC-006/Albertine and
Evaluated— North and East of Project
Fred Heck House
Cass, 116N/23W/22 Listed on External to Project
NRHP boundary- No Impact
Structure CR-CHC-004 an unnamed farmstead located on the west side of County Road
17 approximately 0.5 miles north and west of the Project Area. This structure was inventoried
during a 1980 survey. Its current status is unevaluated for National Register. As the structure is
external to the Project Area it will not be impacted.
Structure CR-CHC-006 is the National Register listed Albertine and Fred Heck home.
The historic property is located approximately 0.2 miles north and west of the Project Area, near
the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Audubon Road in Chanhassen. The listing includes
one contributing structure and one non-contributing structure. The contributing structure is a
well preserved single residence constructed in 1895 of locally produced Chaska-brick. The non-
10
contributing structure is an unattached garage constructed of concrete block. The structures
were originally part of a 105 acre farm settled by a German immigrant family. The listed
structures are located external to the proposed Project Area and will not be impacted by the
proposed construction.
5.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION
Field work was conducted between October 24th and October 26th, 2016. Merjent
Cultural Resource Specialist Matthew Terry served as Field Director. The Project was
considered of moderate to high potential for prehistoric archaeological deposits due to the
proximity to both permanent water resources and the presence of previously documented
cultural resources within one mile of the Project (Figure 2). The Phase I Archaeological
Reconnaissance Survey was conducted to determine if unrecorded cultural resources were
present within the Project's APE. Cultural resources could include archaeological sites or
historic/architectural resources.
Field reconnaissance consisted of a combination of pedestrian survey and shovel test
excavations with a focus on culturally viable landforms. Shovel testing consisted of hand dug
excavation units between 30 and 40 centimeters in diameter. The depth of the excavated shovel
test varied depending on the depth of subsurface deposits and the presence or absence of
intact cultural material. Shovel tests were generally excavated to a depth where intact subsoil
horizons were exposed.
All materials excavated from shovel tests or deep tests were screened through 1/4"
hardware mesh. Detailed field notes were recorded during field investigations along the
individual landforms that were pedestrian surveyed, as well as the shovel tested areas.
Pedestrian survey involved controlled visual inspection of the ground surface. Field personnel
conducting pedestrian surveys were spaced a maximum of 5 m apart and traversed the
segment in parallel transects inspecting the exposed surface for evidence of cultural deposits.
The majority of the land surface investigated had excellent ground surface visibility.
All shovel tests excavated within the Project area were negative for cultural materials.
No intact deposits containing cultural materials relating to the historic or prehistoric period were
identified within the Project boundaries. The Project will have no adverse impact on any
recorded, known, or suspected cultural resources.
11
6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Merjent recommends that there will be no adverse impact on known or suspected
cultural resources as a result of this Project and that no additional cultural resource
investigations are needed. Merjent recommends that if construction plans are altered to affect
areas that were not previously surveyed or disturbed, these locations should be examined for
cultural resources.
In the event that additional archaeological materials are identified during construction
activities, Merjent recommends that construction in proximity to the discovery immediately
cease and procedures be followed to notify the MN SHPO and other agencies, as required.
Further, if human remains are encountered during construction activities, all ground disturbing
activity must cease and local law enforcement must be notified. MS 307.08, the Private
Cemeteries Act, prohibits the intentional disturbance of human burials. Work should not resume
until all issues are resolved.
12
7.0 REFERENCES CITED
Anfinson, Scott.
2005. SHPO Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota. Minnesota Historical
Society of Minnesota. State Historic Preservation Office.
Dobbs, C.A.
1989. Historic Context Outlines: The Contact Period Contexts (ca. 1630 A.D. — 1820
A.D.). Draft. Reports of Investigations No. 39. Institute for Minnesota Archaeology.
Submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Historical Society.
Gibbon, Guy.
2012. Archaeology of Minnesota, the Prehistory of the Upper Mississippi River Region.
University of Minnesota Press.
Minnesota Historical Society (MNHS).
2015. U.S.-Dakota War of 1862. Electronic Document.
http://www.historicfortsnelling.orq/history/us-dakota-war.
Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist ("MN OSA").
2009. Minnesota Archaeological Site Form.
Terrell, Michelle.
2006. Historical Archaeology of Minnesota Farmsteads: Volume 4, Historic Context
Study of Minnesota Farmsteads, 1820-1960. Two Pines Resource Group, LLC, Shafer,
Minnesota.
13
Nom. r; Imo 2 ,i44'.'
mai ''' - • —---- N---:-.
1)-----iii,,;:_,Ti.-,-,ff,--
COw o, f
1,4 em
c 1- -\AC
i•'- c- fi gg .
tl
U• 7
Q. 1 ;
4
il`,a ,/
1•Y
JLSOUN4:(/\j
WIN \J
may •
ry,
J
W
O .
J O r'W - C 1 O -NVAA 7_ N Wit (•I
tiN.)r „ . . ---- -x,1 I
1q
3
V12/ ^) l --- --- IJ----1•1.
1\---- 7 /,,',.. e.,N l D\c3
1.^ C o ' 00i' o p 11114I1
T - , ... 0 o :,_._\i
it\o
73"
if
tic./.30/v--4::-N,_ N a i 1 1to
tW/• `.
1St\.‘
r\
L\ :‘';'.
1 .I
7
ff//(( 1
11
C 1
1 Poo ?,ir , c„ • pa ,t
co'
41):1) .1, I • 0.
r A \--(\ n V‘')(1,N 01 V
m w i-
I
vNi W , • • • ta, N .ii
g • \" Q • ,i(
41.-n ...-
y Ui 1 P.')
m
in
0 0 8 o
3 y —i 0 II + l
c y -o a 1 > D 7:1 > i) 0 3 III ig
9 u• . CO sc8 $ gild"'
a
a D a3FS •zji
0N m = N
m8
a s i o
tD % K < N 5 a ' a a t'7 83 m8
I*
Sm. m m O
o g `O,Fri al. a -, a m
co
o
d C n
C••
i,`:,';-cn=1.- 4 ie- ,t,
6.,.., -,.-
2, ,
Cf3,...—,,,,, ., .,,,N 4?zio, g',xiLl {? . -
C I.--l.1 g __ :.__ ._. _, , ..L
1.
i
r,- ;. .
20ri
H
f, sit.
X1I
tom,-oi 1
S
n
a
rei
S,annod it
i'',' D
rll
D 2 i O o 0 0
n = <_.
5.
o a N N T . D -n N D o o
r ,
F Do o m n o in o• m o
i, 9 n C7 d < n p n < < m o o
v O ' 'il t) lD < < C(D < "- C(D C• n J - CD
o ID C — o)
E.(
Q CD
Hefp0a> O CD H O N o N
a N '' CD Q. o l) CS .H 6' n.0 g -n O
N N
CD d. d -, of CD m m
CD O -a N FIT CD CD n
O < p Ci C), d
d n7 n CD Q,__1.—__Z y+
cn L1
CD
4•1
r
4S. • ;. ,
4,4., fi,,, •fifISr.'',
00:
6.p ... ff0,. `Ilk.iv , , * .4- . s •:4 .-: -,,K, 4710e4 • --,,..-_, k.3.'
4.2%II'A 'r.,... 7 '
p.
I i
4 t
j•1--T-
L..•..,fe,e1..../.45•4r.f,.T, -::,.. iTspow.
lit s.:
ei i :VVIt, . Ot...: ',-,
T ' •'
3...,,-,
s
Ii
5° o '111.).....
A: ' 'T, ,:-' I it*
L
1.*.:.:•.'''.''
A
T.,' '
T* • . 411".X.Iii•-:'4A,,,i..•,.-'P • 1 •• (
1
4 -:-`-... •-,00F,"..-Np.
is 4.-4., -*.c!';''' ..-:..,'4,.., •:-L' .,,,,,,,.';‘,;.,'#.,„..:;'-';.......,i':..,-':':'.,:,•'!;',.:4:-''''..,,,,,, ,,..-‘4:',
1:',„,'-'::--7.t.-
4,:-:-...,?::1,.....1:'w,"-:','-'::::::
V'? ' ••,.. •••••-•(„to •. .•I,1 ,•
A ''
e * '..f., 104.`t-.'1,4d4----• fel- ii,4.':•,' :
t.., rn- 4.;*....,41.''. .' of ,.. .• ',•41, ' .1,,,,'^4" • 4r- , --- '
XaPf.47K• ., ,_ ,.
s--° -'''., ...*•'';.
i.,% '',- ' ''''''44%('' ...-
3‘
401'.;
e''"4 A.;•-•-, •',••
It,-•• .'
L:
t•
rl •..:.'
A. t, t•444,t
7,-;,i;:,.7 47,,,
Ei,...,:.?::,.....::.': '1.4, :=1„.".'
41,,:
t•::',.:
2r4,-..:, i . • ,
1
0
4.1?
Z.:•,.-. _. . .,.c.*.• 4. ,,, ..,v..,. .
IR,
0
cr--',.:
1-
17:
4:
iiitiltTI:
1:-.....
1'. :•:4-•';
C:---'':
0",
1 11 0 i .'1,:l.'0,:q, •.•41,.,..-.1r,,, ,- , .,.CA,n •
F•- '•• '-g'.. '--- ..7 a' ...,•-14
41,1",_,,,t1.14=.'-7 "
17''' '.
i,''''.I• ',' ''ita4--?' • '
alba , 4
v_.'' • ' n'
f - -
1.it-t,-M• --.-- '.---,• • ''e
s.'•49-P'.
44*
r4.
4‘,...,. 1,4r..;;:!,,, - - • •r'ill'''-
r •
i•
s/, - •* it 7.. ,'4.7 . ` ' • 0,1/
I•
I' ' ' •• ' i;'•• '•••-:-.' .' • Pi . ,
00A' *
1 ..
1, ,v ..,.. v.. • .1.r.. . . .
7.',1 14..? • ' '- 1 0..,..41,'. -
i = '.,444, ...1'7- L'''. .' it;'rt'' .-fr-
API:.___-•
i:r -..!---'----'''' 1,"f:.ct.'• *.;i1
1''- MA - .
t._itor-1--"'"": 1-1.411 010.10*:-' 406
2
rn2" I
a o r•-' ‹. c : .
a xj a M
1 (-)
0 , rs) 0 A0irD. ,T a o
o
0.,,-2 ArAp 1--(T)
5 A) c a Ill CD CD 3 i hriti op
i
arg
m
3 v) LA)
0
o m
CD •-•
DIC.f) ::"-0 1 aCD -C) i .7-; FDCDo.
ET-o m z ck2.•
c--,