FIVE-MILE VISUAL APE
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY
Northeast Branch FOR THE PROPOSED DEER RIVER WIND FARM, 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, NY 14227 Tel: (716) 821-1650 TOWNS OF PINCKNEY, HARRISBURG, AND Fax: (716) 821-1607
Southeast Branch 2301 Paul Bryant Drive MONTAGUE, LEWIS COUNTY, NEW YORK Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 Tel: (205) 556-3096 Fax: (205) 556-1144 NEW YORK STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE Mid-South Branch 91 Tillman Street #17PR05791 Memphis, TN 38111 Tel: (901) 454-4733 Fax: (901) 454-4736
Corporate Headquarters P.O. Box 20884 Tuscaloosa, AL 35402 Prepared for: Tel: (205) 248-8767 Fax: (205) 248-8739 STANTEC 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine 04086
Prepared by:
PANAMERICAN CONSULTANTS, INC. Buffalo Branch Office 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, NY 14227 (716) 821-1650
December 2018 FIVE-MILE VISUAL APE ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY
FOR THE PROPOSED DEER RIVER WIND FARM,
TOWNS OF PINCKNEY, HARRISBURG, AND MONTAGUE,
LEWIS COUNTY, NEW YORK
New York State Historic Preservation Office #17PR05791
Prepared for:
STANTEC 30 Park Drive Topsham, Maine 04086
Prepared by:
Christine M. Longiaru, M.A., Senior Architectural Historian/Principal Investigator Mark A. Steinback, M.A., Senior Historian Michael A. Cinquino, Ph.D., RPA, Project Director
PANAMERICAN CONSULTANTS, INC. Buffalo Branch Office 2390 Clinton Street Buffalo, New York 14227 (716) 821-1650
December 2018
Management Summary
SHPO Project Review Number: #17PR05791
Involved Federal and State Agencies: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Public Service Commission
Phase of Survey: Five-mile Visual APE Architectural Resource Survey
Project Location Information: Location: Lewis County / Jefferson County Minor Civil Division: Towns of Harrisburg (MCD 04905), Montague (MCD 04912), Pinckney (MCD 04915) / Town of Rodman (MCD 04517)
Five-Mile Visual APE Study Area Location Information: Location: Lewis County Minor Civil Division: Towns of Denmark (MCD 04902), Harrisburg (MCD 04905), Montague (MCD 04912), Pinckney (MCD 04915), and Village of Copenhagen (MCD 04943)
Location: Jefferson County Minor Civil Division: Towns of Champion (MCD 04506), Rodman (MCD 04517), Rutland (MCD 04518), Watertown (MCD 04520), and Worth (MCD 04522)
Number of Proposed Turbines: 25
USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Maps (all New York): Barnes Corners (1959), Carthage (1943), Copenhagen (1942), New Boston, (1943), Page (1943), Rodman (1959), Rutland Center (1959), Sears Pond (1943), Watertown (1959), West Lowville (1943), Worth Center (1960)
Survey Area (Metric & English): approximately +198.44 sq. miles
Results of Historic Resources Identified in 5-mile Visual APE Study Area (See Tables 4.1) Number of S/NRHP-Listed resources: 1 Number of S/NRHP-Eligible (Individual) resources: 20 (Note, six other S/NRHP-eligible resources in study area but not in Visual APE). Number of recommended State/National Register Eligible (Individual) resources: 12 Number of Historic Districts with an “Undetermined” S/NRHP eligibility status: 2 Number resources recommended with an “Undetermined” S/NRHP eligibility status: 9
Report Author(s): C.M. Longiaru, M.A. Steinback, D.A. Smith
Date of Report: December 2018
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. ii Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE Table of Contents
Management Summary ...... ii List of Figures and Tables ...... iv
1.0 Introduction ...... 1-1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1-1
2.0 Context and Background Research ...... 2-1 2.1 Historic Period ...... 2-1 2.2 Historical Maps ...... 2-8
3.0 Methodology ...... 3-1 3.1 National Register Criteria ...... 3-1 3.2 Assessment of Adverse Effects to Historic Properties ...... 3-1 3.3 Project Consultation ...... 3-3 3.4 Previous Historic Architectural Resources Surveys in the Study Area ...... 3-3 3.5 Surveys Methods ...... 3-3
4.0 Historic Resources Survey Results ...... 4-1 4.1 Jefferson County Municipalities ...... 4-1 Town of Champion (MCD 04506) ...... 4-1 Town of Rodman (MCD 04517)...... 4-1 Town of Rutland (MCD 04518) ...... 4-2 Town of Watertown (MCD 04520) ...... 4-2 Town of Worth (MCD 04522) ...... 4-2 4.2 Lewis County Municipalities ...... 4-2 Town of Denmark (MCD 04902)...... 4-2 Town of Harrisburg (MCD 04905) ...... 4-2 Town of Montague (MCD 04912) ...... 4-2 Town of Pinckney (MCD 04915) ...... 4-3 Village of Copenhagen (MCD 04943) ...... 4-3
5.0 Visual Impacts to Architectural Resources ...... 5-1
6.0 Mitigation of Visual Impacts ...... 6-1
7.0 References ...... 7-1
Appendix A: Locations of Architectural Resources within Five Miles of Project Location (Project map)
Appendix B: Annotated List of Architectural Resources in Deer River Five--mile Visual APE
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. iii Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE List of Figures and Tables
FIGURE PAGE
1.1 General visual APE study area in the Towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, and Montague, Lewis County, and the Town of Rodman, Jefferson County, New York ...... 1-2
1.2 General boundary of the five-mile visual APE study area in Lewis and Jefferson counties, as well as the general locations of previously investigated wind-power projects in proximity to the current project ...... 1-3
2.1 Approximate location of the project area (red oval) as shown with Northern New York land purchases prior to 1800 ...... 2-2
2.2a The approximate location of the project area (between red lines) in the Town of Pinckney in 1875 ...... 2-9
2.2b The approximate location of the project area (to the left of the red line) in the Town of Harrisburg in 1875 ...... 2-10
2.2c The approximate location of the project area (in red) in the Town of Montague in 1875 ...... 2-11
2.3 The approximate location of the project area (to the right of the red line) in the Town of Rodman in 1864 ...... 2-11
2.4 The approximate location of the project area (to the right of the red line) in the Town of Rodman in 1888 ...... 2-12
2.5 The approximate location of the project area in Lewis and Jefferson counties in the early 1900s ...... 2-13
5.1 Frequency of structures relative to distance to the nearest proposed wind turbine ...... 5-2
TABLE PAGE
4.1 Resources in the Deer River Wind Farm Five-Mile Visual APE Study Area...... 4-4
5.1 Visual impacts to historic properties in the project visual APE ...... 5-4
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. iv Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE 1.0 Introduction
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. (Panamerican) was contracted by Stantec, Topsham, Maine, to conduct a historic resources survey of the five-mile visual Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the proposed Deer River Wind Farm in the towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, and Montague, Lewis County, New York (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). The visual APE is defined as the area from which the proposed undertaking may be visible within five miles from the project site (New York State Historic Preservation Office [NYSHPO] 2006). Panamerican generated a visual APE based on topography to determine where the project may be visible from (i.e., positive visual APE).
The project would have an estimated generating capacity, or nameplate capacity, of up to 100 megawatts (MW) of power from 25 wind turbines. Atlantic Wind LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Avangrid Renewables, LLC (AR), is proposing to submit an application to construct a major electric generating facility under Article 10 of the Public Service Law (PSL).
The proposed wind turbines range in height from a maximum tip height of 492 feet (150 meters) to 591 ft (180 m). Occupying an area 200+ square miles (sq. mi), the study area spans approximately 5.6 miles north-south and 7 miles east-west. The study area also includes the Town of Denmark and Village of Copenhagen in Lewis County and the towns of Champion, Rodman, Rutland, Watertown, and Worth in Jefferson County. The proposed visual APE study area is depicted in Figure 1.1, and extends five miles in all directions from the project turbines. The total survey area of the five-mile visual APE study area in Lewis County is 123+ sq. mi. and 77+ sq mi are in Jefferson County.
The proposed transmission interconnection location for the Deer River Wind Farm project crosses into the Town of Rodman in Jefferson County. Since Article 10 defines an electric-generating facility to include the transmission interconnection point, the Town of Rodman is within the project area although no wind turbines are currently proposed for location in that municipality. The proposed study area covers approximately 44.24 square miles. During the development phase of the project, Atlantic Wind will lease approximately 8,000 acres of land, which will be spread out over this larger project area. However, once the project is constructed, the proposed permanent improvements would utilize less than 100 acres, where turbines, collection lines, roads, and facility components are constructed and buffers around these features are maintained. At that point, the vast majority of previously leased land will be released from lease agreements and would not be included in the facility, once constructed (Muscato and Bomyea 2016:6).
The five-mile visual APE architectural survey included the following: archival, documentary, and historical map research; a search of the NYSHPO Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS) for properties listed or eligible for listing in the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places (S/NRHP) and previously inventoried resources in the five-mile visual APE; a reconnaissance survey of historical buildings/structures (50 years old or greater) in the project area; and data collection with CRIS Trekker application. The survey was conducted in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (as amended), the National Environmental Policy Act, the New York State Historic Preservation Act, and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, as well as all relevant federal and state legislation. The architectural survey methodology complies with the NYSHPO’s Guidelines for Wind Farm Development Cultural Resources Survey Work (2006). Panamerican conducted the field investigation in November 2017. Senior Architectural Historian Ms. Christine M. Longiaru served as Principal Investigator, Senior Historian Mr. Mark Steinback, M.A., was project historian, and Senior Archaeologist Dr. Michael A. Cinquino, RPA, served as project director. Dr. Don Smith, Ms. Caitlin McClellan, and Ms. Emily Burch provided GIS technical support.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 1-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 1.1. General visual APE study area in the Towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, and Montague, Lewis County, and the Town of Rodman, Jefferson County, New York (Avangrid Renewables 2016).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 1-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 1.2. General boundary of the five-mile visual APE study area in Lewis and Jefferson counties, as well as the general locations of previously investigated wind-power projects in proximity to the current project area (Panamerican 2017; USGS 1985).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 1-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
2.0 Context and Background Research
2.1 HISTORIC PERIOD
The French were the first recorded Europeans to penetrate the valley of the St. Lawrence River. As early as 1615, Samuel de Champlain and a party of his Native allies landed in the vicinity of Chaumont, Henderson, and Black Bay on their way inland to harass the Oneida south of the Mohawk River (Aldenderfer 1982:III-23). French traders or Jesuit missionaries may have briefly visited the region and explored the area’s streams during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but there are not records of such stops (Trigger 1978).
Colonial Period. The arrival of the Dutch in 1624 at what is now the City of Albany, initiated an era of rabid competition among the imperial powers for the lucrative fur trade. This competition spilled over to the Native nations with whom the Europeans dealt. As the supply of furs began to decline in the 1630s and 1640s, some Mohawk and Oneida ambushed and attacked Algonquians and French in the Ottawa and upper St. Lawrence valleys. These raids would continue intermittently until the end of the century. In 1664, the British seized New Netherland from the Dutch, renaming it New York, thereby becoming the patrons of the Haudenosaunee. For the British, as it had earlier for the French, the fur trade became an essential imperial concern, and the struggle between the English and the French over the fur trade once again affected their Native American clients, who were forced to ally themselves with one or the other power. The subsequent competition in the New World resulted in the erection of fortified trading posts within the frontier by both kingdoms.
Despite the erection of European posts in the Niagara, Mohawk, and St. Lawrence valleys, what is now northern New York was largely free of settlement until the middle of the eighteenth century. The British erected what became Fort Oswego near Lake Ontario (in what is now Oswego County) in 1727. This fort became their main frontier outpost during this period; and, as a result, the provisioning and protection of it became an imperial imperative. In 1749, a collection of Christian Haudenosaunee (identified as the Oswegatchies, but really Oneida, Onondaga, and Cayuga) settled at La Presentation (present-day Ogdensburg). This group, comprising approximately 1,500 people by 1751, was later dispersed into the St. Regis and Onondaga reservations (ca. 1807). This location served as a place for raids against British settlements in the Mohawk and Hudson valleys during the French and Indian War (Hurd 1880:117, 375; Blau et al. 1978:494-495). However, the French were unable to maintain this position.
In August 1760, troops under the command of Major General Jeffery Amherst dispersed the French and Indian occupation at La Presentation and the signing of Treaty of Paris in 1763 officially terminated French claims in most of North America. While the migration of homesteaders into the frontier recommenced at the end of the French and Indian War, no permanent settlements had been established in the lands north or west of German Flats in the Mohawk valley. Nevertheless, the erection of forts and trading posts and the trickle of European-American settlers into the northern and western woodlands aggravated relations with the Native groups who already lived and hunted there (Tooker 1978:433-434; Blau et al. 1978:495). The "Property Line Treaty of 1768" ceded to the British all lands east of the Allegheny Mountains (including territory not actually under Haudenosaunee control), excepting reservations of Mohawks and others, for the purposes of settlement. What is now Lewis County was well north of this line, and was generally not settled except for small outposts along the major rivers (Campisi 1978:483; Tooker 1978:434).
During the American Revolution, the fortifications at Oswegatchie were garrisoned by the British and served as the staging area for many of the marauding parties that harassed frontier settlements. Fighting on the frontier remained well south of the project area and consisted largely of raids in the Mohawk, Wyoming, and Cherry valleys (Abler and Tooker 1978:507-508; Campisi 1978:483). After the war, as a result of the Second Fort Stanwix Treaty (1784) the Haudenosaune lost all their land west of the Niagara River, except for small reservations. This treaty was disputed by several groups of Haudenosaunee until 1794, when a treaty was signed at Canandaigua between the United States and the Six Nations which defined the boundaries of Seneca lands and the reservations to the other Haudenosaunee nations (Abler
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
and Tooker 1978:508). European-American settlement in northern New York dates from the end of the American Revolution.
Northern New York was virtually unbroken wilderness in 1783 except for a few settlements fringing Lake Champlain. In fact, most of the region lying between Lake Champlain on the east, Lake Ontario on the west, the St. Lawrence River on the north, and the southern slopes of the Adirondacks remained wilderness until late in the nineteenth century [Ellis et al. 1967:156].
Early State Period. With the return of peace, settlers and land speculators again began to stream northward, exerting pressure to open up land formerly occupied by the Haudenosaunee. Alexander Macomb purchased 640,000 acres on the south side of the St. Lawrence River in 1787. Later, after the state acquired northern New York in a 1788 treaty at Fort Stanwix, Macomb, as leader of a three-man company, added 3,670,000 acres to his holdings in 1791, including all of what would become Jefferson and Lewis counties. Macomb’s eponymous purchase was surveyed into six great tracts and put up for sale. Tracts Four, Five, and Six fell under the supervision of William Constable, who took over complete control after Macomb became insolvent” (Ellis et al. 1967:156-157; Dill 1990). Tracts One, Two, and Three, comprising the northern part of Macomb’s Purchase, “had a similar history” (Ellis et al. 1967:157). The current project area situated in what were Great Tracts No. 5 and 6.
Figure 2.1. Approximate location of the project area (red oval) as shown with Northern New York land purchases prior to 1800 (adapted from Ellis et al. 1967:157).
With Macomb’s bankruptcy, William Constable (one of Macomb’s partners) actively sought buyers for property lots in the great tracts. Constable’s efforts to develop the Black River valley led him to France, where 210,000 acres were purchased by La Compagnie de New York in 1793 and 600,000 were sold to the Antwerp Company. The land of La Compagnie became known as “Castorland” for the extensive number of beaver (“castor” is beaver in French) that were reputed to inhabit the heavily forested area. The current project area is located southwest of Castorland, although some settlements were farther south and east along the Black River. La Compagnie purchased the land to serve as a haven for French Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
aristocrats (with their servants) escaping the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. Several built grand estates now in ruin. Other speculators were attracted to the pristine North Country, including Joseph Bonaparte (Napoleon’s older brother), John Brown of Providence, Rhode Island, David Parrish, William Inman, and James LeRay (de Chaumont) (Ellis et al. 1967:156-157; Pilcher 1985:2-3, 22-24, 122; Powell 1976). “All in all, the north country proved a disappointment to most land speculators, who could not successfully compete with the holders of the richer lands of western New York and, subsequently, of the Great Lakes states” (Ellis et al. 1967:158).
Closer to the project area, Thomas Boylston acquired all the Macomb’s purchase south and west of the Black River (the Black River Tract), except Inman’s Triangle in 1792 from Samuel Ward. However, after passing through the hands of several other speculators as a result of insufficient or questionable financing, the land was acquired in 1795 by Nicholas Low, William Henderson, Richard Harrison, and Josiah Ogden Hoffman. The following year the entire tract was subdivided by Benjamin Wright into eleven townships and distributed among the owners with acreage in the Town of Worth used to balance any inequities among the partners. Townships 1 (present-day Hounsfield, Jefferson County), 4 (Champion, Jefferson County), 5 (Denmark, Lewis County), 8 (Rodman, Jefferson County), and 10 (Harrisburg, Lewis County) were apportioned to Harrison and Hoffman; Township 2 (Watertown, Jefferson County, 7 (Adams, Jefferson County), and 11 (Lowville, Lewis County) apportioned to Nicolas Low; and Townships 3 (Rutland, Jefferson County), 6 (Henderson, Jefferson County), and 9 (Pinckney, Lewis County) apportioned to William Henderson. During the next several years the proprietors transferred interest in their shares to several other parties, and the lands were finally offered for sale to settlers in 1801 (Hough 1860:26; Emerson 1898; Goebel and Smith 1980:219-231).
Settlement in the Black River valley took root slowly during the late eighteenth century into the early nineteenth century as a result of stony soils, a short growing season, and inadequate in-land transportation (Ellis et al. 1967:156). Several of the more intrepid French settlers had begun settling their Castorland properties nearest the Black River at what is now Lyons Falls in the 1794 and Geoffrey Desjardins erected a mill near what is now Carthage in 1795, although these endeavors were short-lived with many of the immigrants returning to France. While speculators of the large land tracts were generally unsuccessful, numerous homesteaders from New England, in general, and Vermont, in particular, were drawn to the area by its cheap land and potential for industrial and commercial activity. During the early nineteenth century, rural communities formed around gristmill and sawmill sites as other enterprises, such as stores, taverns, and schools, emerged to service these nascent villages. The Village of Lowville was established in 1798, and developed into the commercial center of Lewis County during the nineteenth century (Pilcher 1985; Widdis 1991:233; Ellis 1991:109-110; Kula et al. 1989:18). Lewis County was created from Oneida County in March 1805 and name for then Governor of New York Morgan Lewis. The county initially was divided into five towns: Harrisburg, Leyden, Lowville, Martinsburg, and Turin. Adjacent Jefferson County was created at the same time and named to honor the third president of the United States, and comprised two towns: Mexico and Leyden (Hough 1860).
Aside from ample waterpower, entrepreneurs exploited other natural resources of the area, including iron ore and abundant timber. Serving as the foundation for nascent communities, prominent local forges attracted both people and additional commercial enterprises. For example, Sterlingburgh, initially a bloomary forge in 1816, attracted other industries including a distillery (1824), and a grist and plaster mill after 1835, as well as residential housing. Other types of iron production facilities included Joseph Bonaparte’s short-lived blast furnace on the Indian River, which produced pig and cast before being sold in 1852 to James Sterling, the region’s iron magnate. Sterling had operated iron mines in the area since 1837 as well as a blast furnace on Black Creek and a charcoal kiln. Sterling’s iron works persevered through the vacillations of the iron market and were sold to the Jefferson Iron company in 1869. This company ceased operation in 1881 and the last ore shipment was sent in 1890. Other iron operations in the area were located at Alpina, and Philadelphia. Sterlingburg became Sterlingville and was subsumed into the Fort Drum military reservation, north of the project area (Klein et al. 1985:2/16-17; Child 1890).
As expected, agriculture provided the chief livelihood for most area residents. “The first cash crop from the heavily timbered land was potash derived from burning the timber cut while clearing land” (Klein et al. 1985:2-18). While land in the Black River valley was generally fertile, the rugged topography of the Tug Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Hill Plateau area precluded intensive agriculture. The thin soils of the plateau encouraged dairying and cheese making was a major nineteenth century industry in Lewis and Jefferson counties until the twentieth century. Begun largely for local or household consumption, numerous small cheese making operations flourished in the area during the second half of the nineteenth century, including several associated with cheese magnate F.X. Baumert (Kula et al. 1989:18-19; Klein et al. 1985:2/18-19; Aldenderfer et al. 1982:III-32).
Improved transportation networks improved commerce and industry as well as linking the area to the rest of New York State. Largely unpaved turnpike and plank roads connected the various industrial sites and small communities with distribution sites and farming areas prior to 1850. Initiating an economic boom beginning in 1848, the Black River Canal connected Carthage to Lyons Falls to the Erie Canal near Rome. The canal carried timber, mill and agricultural products from the region to downstate markets. With the advent of more reliable rail transportation in the North Country by the late nineteenth century, the canal was gradually abandoned between 1900 and 1925 (Ellis et al. 1967:246; Hough 1883:132).
Economic growth of Lewis County was enhanced by the introduction of railroad facilities after 1853. While the Northern Railroad (1850) connected Ogdensburg and other northern towns with the main, mid-state line, the Black River & Utica Railroad connected Philadelphia (NY), Boonville, Lowville (by 1868), and Carthage (by 1872) with Utica and points south (Aldenderfer et al. 1982:III-36; Klein et al. 1985:2-20; Kula et al. 1989:19). The more prominent Rome, Watertown & Ogdensburg Railroad hauled freight, passengers and dairy products (after refrigerated boxcars were invented). The two routes merged in 1886 and were consolidated in 1891 with the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad (Meinig 1966:176).
Immigration of different ethnic groups served to dilute the area’s predominant New England character. After the completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, Irish immigrants trickled into the region, reinforced by another stream during the late 1840s with the construction of the Black River Canal. Germans arrived during the mid-century as well. As one might expect due to the area’s proximity to Canada, English- and French-Canadians were a noticeable presence in the area’s lumber and manufacturing industries, particularly after the 1870s. Italians and Eastern Europeans arrived during the late 1890s into 1900s (Widdis 1991:233).
The largest municipality in the vicinity of the project area, Lowville became Lewis County’s commercial hub with a stop on the railroad and a canal running through it. Industrial and commercial development also occurred in the smaller villages and hamlets during the nineteenth century, including the Village of Copenhagen (Hough 1883). However, the economic prosperity did not last.
At the end of the nineteenth century as a result of increasing deforestation the once-prominent lumbering industry entered a long period of decline. The area’s geographic isolation also would play a role in the decline of the manufacturing sector, as businesses sought to decrease transportation costs with the advent of cheaper electric power. Suffering a similar fate during the twentieth century, the cheese and dairying industry declined and consolidated as a result of competition from Wisconsin farms and increasing mechanization. The loss of economic opportunities resulted in a flight of population (Widdis 1991; Klein et al. 1985:2-19). At the end of the twentieth century, two cheese factories remained in the vicinity of the project area: Queens farm in Pierrepont Manor and Kraft Farm in Lowville. The Lowville train station was razed in 1960 and the tracks were removed in four years later (Kula et al. 1989:20).
The military presence in the area began in 1908 as the New York State National Guard and the U.S. Army held maneuvers on 10,000 acres around Pine Plains east of Watertown. Beginning in 1910, Pine Camp was permanently established as a site for maneuvers and artillery testing. A landing strip for planes was added in the 1920s. The camp added over 80,000 acres of land to its reservation during World War II and was renamed Camp Drum in 1951. Consisting of 107,265 acres at present, the installation was renamed Fort Drum in September 1974 (Klein et al. 1985:2/20-21). Currently, the fort is home to the U.S. Army 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry) and involved in the mobilization and training of almost 80,000 troops annually. The population of Lewis County increased from 26,944 in 2000 to 27,087 in 2010. The population of nearby Jefferson County also increased during the period; from 111,738 in 2010 to 116,229 in 2010. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Lewis County Towns.
Town of Pinckney. Initially township number 9 (Handel), the town was originally part of the Town of Mexico and included as a part of the Town of Harrisburg in 1804. It was later divided with the creation of Lewis County in 1805 with the eastern part retained by Harrisburg and the western part was included as part of the Town of Rodman. Formed in 1808 from the Town of Harrisburg, the town was under the proprietorship of William Henderson after the division of the Black River Tract. The town is named for a member of the Pinckney family of South Carolina, none of whom have any connection to the area. William Denning, Henderson’s brother-in-law, actively promoted settlement of the town beginning in the 1820s. Pioneers during the early nineteenth century included Samuel and Joseph Clear, Ethan Russell, J. Greene, John Lucas, David Canfield, Levi and Elisha Barnes, James and Stephen Hart, James Armstrong, and Phineas Woolworth, among others (Hough 1883). During the second half of the nineteenth century industry was centered at the community of Barnes’ Corners, which in the 1880s supported four stores, an undertaker, two wagon shops, two blacksmith shops, a shoe shop, a harness maker, two saw and planing mills, a hoop factory, and a manufacturer of farm implements, and a cheese factory (Hough 1883). Two other cheese factories and five sawmills were dispersed throughout the town. A community called New Boston on the Deer River supported a cheese factory, a cheese box factory, a grist mill, a planing mill, and a lath mill. Pinckney State Forest is located in the northern portion of the town, and other county and state forested areas are situated within the town, including Tug Hill, Lookout and Granger state forests. Both Barnes’ Corners and New Boston are along present-day NY 177. The population of the Town of Pinckney in 2010 was 329, increasing from 319 in 2000.
Town of Harrisburg. Formed from the towns of Lowville, Champion (in Jefferson County), and Mexico (Oswego County) in 1803, Harrisburg attained its present size in 1808. The town was originally included in the Black River Tract (number 10, Platina), and is named for Richard Harrison, an early proprietor of the town, as well as a lawyer for both Constable and Pierrepont at one time. Early settlers of the town included Ralph Stoddard, John Bush, Ashbel Humphrey, Jared Knapp, Silas Greene, Charles Wright, Jr., Andrew Mills, Solomon Buck, Thomas and Ebenezer Kellogg, Palmer Hodge, Mark Petrie, Lewis Graves, and Jabez Wright, among others. Largely a farming community, the town at one time during the late nineteenth century supported eight cheese factories (Hough 1883). Cobb Creek State Forest is found in the central portion of the town, east of Deer River. The population of the Town of Harrisburg in 2010 was 437, increasing from 423 in 2000.
Town of Montague. Originally part of the Boylston Tract (Township number 3, Shakespeare), the Town of Montague was formed from the Town of West Turin in November 1850. It was named in honor of Mary Montague Pierrepont, one of the daughters of Hezekiah Pierrepont, a former proprietor of the town. The town was unsubdivided Pierrepont property until 1853 when the unconveyed portions of the property were conveyed to Joseph Bicknell and James Miner, both of whom were Pierrepont’s sons-in- law. Settled late in the nineteenth century, Montague’s first settler was Solomon Holden in 1846. A sawmill was constructed by Samuel P. Sears in 1847. Another sawmill was built in 1850 along the Deer River. Joseph Gardner was the first merchant (Hough 1883). Other early settlers included Calvin Rawson, Leonard Savage, Peter and Cornelius Durham, Oliver Stafford, William D. Bucklin, Isaiah Burr, and Zebulon Marcellus, among others. Largely a dairy farming community, the town supported six sawmills (two steam and four hydraulic), three stores, two blacksmiths, and four coopers during the late nineteenth century (Hough 1883). Grant Powell Memorial State Forest, Sears Pond State Forest, and the Tug Hill Wildlife Management Area are all located in the central portion of the town. The Lewis County Forest in situated west of Grant Powell State Forest. The population of the Town of Montague in 2010 was 78, decreasing from 108 in 2000.
Town of Lowville. What is now the Town of Lowville was part of the Black River Tract (Township 11) and was assigned to Nicholas Low when the tract was divided among the four proprietors in August 1796. The area was surveyed and opened for sale in 1798. Later, it was acquired by Silas Stow (Low’s .land agent) and was included in the eponymous “Stow’s Square.” Pioneers of the town included Daniel Kelly and Moses Water in the area around the present village of Lowville where a sawmill and gristmill were constructed prior to 1800 (Hough 1860). The Town of Lowville was established in March 1800. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-5 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Settled around 1795, the Village of Lowville supported a gristmill, a sawmill, a tavern, an inn, a tannery, and a hat shop by 1814. The largest municipality in the vicinity of the project area, Lowville became Lewis County’s commercial hub with a stop on the railroad and a canal running through it. Industrial and commercial development also occurred in the smaller villages and hamlets during the nineteenth century, including the Village of Copenhagen (Hough 1883). The population of the Town of Lowville in 2010 was 4,982, increasing from 4,551 in 2000. The population of the Village of Lowville was 3,470 in 2010.
Town of Denmark. Formed in 1807 from the Town of Harrisburg, it had been referred to as Mantua (Township 10 of the Black River Tract) on earlier maps. Initial settlement was made by Abel French near what is now the village of Deer River ca 1799. The hamlet of Denmark was settled the following year by Jesse Blodget. Blodget kept a tavern as early as 1812 and erected a large stone hotel in 1824. A sawmill was erected along the Deer River in what is now the village of Copenhagen in 1801 by two men named Munger. It was later joined by a tavern, store, and other mills and the community was renamed Copenhagen by 1807. Freedom Wright erected the first frame house (an inn) in the hamlet of Denmark, and Levi Barnes constructed the first frame in Copenhagen. The village later became a stop on the Rome & Watertown Railroad and was incorporated in 1869. The village at one time supported a cheese factory, a furniture factory, a boot and shoe factory, and several blacksmiths (Hough 1883). The population of the Town of Denmark in 2010 was 2,860, increasing from 2,744 in 2000. The population of the Village of Copenhagen was 801 in 2010.
Town of Martinsburg. Originally part of the Boylston (township number 4, Cornells) and Black River Tract, the Town of Martinsburg was formed from the Town of Turin in March 1803. It was named for Walter Martin, the proprietor of the town at the time of settlement. Martin acquired 8,000 acres within the Boylston Tract erected the first sawmill in the town, which served as an impetus for further settlement. He later settled his family in the town in 1802. During the 1850s and 1860s a short-lived boom in lead and copper mining hit the town (Hough 1883). The population of the Town of Martinsburg in 2010 was 1,433, increasing from 1,249 in 2000.
Jefferson County Towns. Named to honor the third president of the United States, Jefferson County was culled from Oneida County on March 28, 1805. At that time, Watertown was selected for the county seat. During the early nineteenth century, Sackets Harbor was an important military outpost for the fledgling United States government. In 1809 soldiers were stationed there to control smuggling and formal trade between northern New York and Canada. During the War of 1812, Sackets Harbor became a center of U.S. naval and military activity in the northern theater (Ellis et al. 1967:140-141). During the last half of the twentieth century, recreational activities and vacationing have become an important sector in the North Country economy, especially for those areas near the lake and the Thousand Islands. In 2010, Jefferson County had a population of 116,229.
Town of Rodman. Formed from townships number 8 (Orpheus) and 9 (Handel) of the Black River Tract in 1804, the town was within the Town of Adams in Oswego County at that time. The original name of the town was Harrison, named for Richard Harrison, an early proprietor of the town, as well as a lawyer for both Constable and Pierrepont at one time. The town attained its present size and the name Rodman in 1808 (after the clerk of the Assembly, Daniel Rodman). Early settlers of the town included Noah, Asa, Jonathan, and Aaron Davis, Ebenezer Moody, Simeon Hunt, William Rice, and Benjamin Thomas ca. 1801. William Rice erected the first sawmill in the town on Sandy Creek in 1804 as well as a grist mill two years later, 1806. Simeon Hunt kept a public house. Subsequent settlers included William Dodge, Timothy Greenly, Reuben Smith, Daniel Todd, Thomas White, and Ariel Edwards. Enoch Todd, son of Daniel, built a tannery along Sandy Creek in 1806, and was also a shoemaker. Around the house and gristmill of Thomas White emerged the community of Whitesville in the northeastern corner of the town. Benjamin Stillman operated a tavern a little south of the community. The community also supported a store, a sawmill, and a hotel at the end of the nineteenth century (Emerson 1898; Child 1890).
As expected, potash and pearlash were the most profitable early commodities of the town as landowners cleared their lands in preparation for farming. Initially, corn, wheat, and rye were raised, but access to markets was difficult with the lack of adequate roads. As a result a number of distilleries were established Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-6 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
along Sandy Creek to produce another commodity. Early distilleries were owned by Hiram Slocum, Asa Davis, C.W. McKinstry, and W.J. Nichols. Although by the end of the nineteenth century, no distilleries were in operation in the town. The population of the town was 1,287 in 1890. Butter and cheese making were prominent industries during the second half of the nineteenth century, and numerous cheese factories were in operation (Emerson 1898). The population of the Town of Rodman in 2010 increased from 1,147 in 2000 to 1,176 in 2010.
Town of Champion. Formed from the Town of Mexico (Oswego County) in 1800, the town attained its present size in 1808. The area was originally included in the Black River tract, and was acquired by General Henry Champion and Colonel Lemuel Storrs ca. 1798. Early settlers of the town included Noadiah Hubbard, Silas Stow, Eli Church, Joel Mix, Timothy Pool, William Hadsall, Daniel Coffeen, and Moses Goodrich, among others. The Town of Champion was leading agricultural area in the county during the nineteenth century. Cheese making was a prominent industry during the second half of the nineteenth century, and numerous cheese factories were in operation. The Babcock cheese factory was one of the first in the county in 1862, and was situated north of Champion village (Emerson 1898). The population of the Town of Champion in 2010 was 4,494, increasing from 4,361 in 2000.
Town of Rutland. Formed in 1802 from the Town of Watertown, the town (number 3 of the Black River Tract) was under the proprietorship of William Henderson after the division of the Black River Tract in 1796. The earliest settler was Asher Miller, land agent who actively sold parcels to subsequent pioneers. He was followed by Ezekial Andrews in 1800. David Coffeen and Samuel Parker constructed the first gristmill in the town in 1800, which was followed by a sawmill in 1801. Samuel Porter, Joseph Russell, and Abel Sherman were also early settlers (Emerson 1898). The population of the Town of Rutland in 2010 was 3,060, increasing from 2,959 in 2000.
Town of Lorraine. Originally part of the Town of Mexico when it was part of Oneida County, the town was created in 1804 as the Town of Malta. Its name was changed to Lorraine in 1808. The area was included as Township number 1 (Atticus) in the Black River Tract, and was acquired by John Johnson Phyn in 1794. Circuitously, the lands comprising the town ended up with William Constable by 1796. By 1819 Hezekiah Pierrepont acquired the title to the unsold portions of the town. Nevertheless, James McKee and Elijah Fox, squatters, erected a log house in 1802, which they converted to a tavern. With the completion of the Rome to Brownville turnpike in 1803, settlement of the area in general increased. Early pioneers included Comfort Stancliff, Benjamin Gates, Seth Cutler, Clark Allen, William and Isaac Lanfear, Aaron, Ebenezer, Walter, Parley, and Joel Brown, and John Alger, who later converted his home into a tavern, among others (Emerson 1898).
Dr. Isaac Weston and David Frost were early hotel keepers. Michael Frost erected the first sawmill in the town in 1804. The mill was destroyed and rebuilt by Mabb & Aldrich in 1810. The mill passed through several hands before the Civil War. Seth Cutler erected the first gristmill ca. 1805 on Deer Creek. Thomas and Comfort Stancliff operated a sawmill on Deer Creek about the same time. Numerous other sawmills were in operation in the town during the Antebellum period. Like other interior New York towns, potash and pearlash were the most profitable early commodities as settlers cleared their land of trees in preparation for farming. Initially, corn, wheat, and rye were raised, but as more fertile lands in the Midwest were opened cattle raising, including dairy farming became prominent. The population of the town was 1,174 in 1890. Butter and cheese making were prominent industries during the second half of the nineteenth century, and numerous cheese factories were in operation (Emerson 1898). The population of the Town of Lorraine in 2010 was 1,037, increasing from 930 in 2000.
Town of Watertown. Township number 2 of the Black River Tract, the town was under the proprietorship of Nicholas Low after the division of the Black River Tract in 1796. Land speculators Nicholas Low, Henry Champion, and others lobbied the legislature to create the town in anticipation of future settlement. The town, which included what are now the towns of Rutland and Hounsfield, was formed as Watertown in March 1800 as part of Oneida County. The town attained its present configuration in 1806. The earliest settlers were Seyrel Harrington and Joshua Priest who settled in the southern part of the town in 1800. Other pioneers included Deacon Oliver Bartholmew, Simeon and Benjamin Woodruff, Jotham, Joel, and Titus Ives, Adam Blodgett, Samuel Bates, Asaph Butterfield, Ebenezer lazelle, Williams Sampson, Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-7 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Jonathan Miles, Jacob Sears, Seth Peck, Henderson and Silas Howk, Job Whitney, Caleb and Nathaniel Burnham, Eli and James Rogers, Aaron Brown, Corlis Hinds, Jonathan Baker, William Huntington, John Gotham, Seth Bailey, Davis Doty, and Levi Cole, among others (Emerson 1898).
Manufacturing and industrial activity clustered along Sandy Creek in the Hamlet of Burrville, where Hart Massey built a saw and grist mill ca. 1801. John Burr purchased the property the following year. Jabez Foster opened a store near the mill, but the establishment of the Village of Watertown as the county seat drew much of the surrounding commercial and manufacturing interests to it. Other commercial activity at Burrville included William Lampson’s blacksmith shop, as well as an axe factory and triphammer (which was still active as late as 1865). In 1806 James Mann operated a tannery. The area also supported a shoemaker, a carding machine and clothdressing works, as well as a hotel, an ashery, and Rev. Ebenezer Lazelle's distillery (Emerson 1898). However, according to Emerson (1898), “From first to last the history of the town at large has been uneventful, and neither record nor tradition furnishes us with many noteworthy incidents of pioneer life in the region.” The population of the Town of Watertown in 2010 was 4,470, decreasing from 4,482 in 2000.
Town of Worth. Formed In the early history of the subdivision of Boylston and Black River tracts, lots in what is now the Town of Worth served as compensation land to make up the differences in area and value of other towns and tracts when the large tract was subdivided among the individual partners. In 1795, William Constable, agent for John Johnson Phyn, sold to Nicholas Low, William Henderson, Richard Harrison, and Josiah Ogden Hoffman the Black River Tract. However, when the tract was subdivided among the partners the size of the tract was less than estimated, so Constable, to make good the difference, conveyed portions of what is now Worth to these proprietors. Harrison & Hoffman acquired the lion’s share of the town, which they surveyed and laid out. Hoffman took the north half, which he conveyed to Daniel McCormick to sell the land and hold the proceeds until certain debts were paid (Emerson 1898).
Township number 2, then called Fenelon, later forming a part of Malta or Lorraine, but now the Town of Worth, was acquired in 1802 by Leonard Bullock and Asaph Case. Early settlers included Elihu Gillet and John Houghtailing (in 1802), and Joseph Wilcox, Nathan Mattoon, and Timothy Greenly (in 1803). Joshua Miles erected a combined saw and grist mill on Sandy Creek in 1810. It was later owned by Timothy Greenly and Abner Rising. This was the only grist mill in the town for many years. Ca. 1816 Joseph Wilcox and Green Kellogg built a sawmill at Wilcox’s Mill (what is now Worthville), on the site of the grist mill that existed at the end of the nineteenth century. In 1819 Lorenzo Gillet opened a store and tavern under one roof at Wilcox’s Mill. Agriculture, as expected, was the predominant industry, comprising grazing, including the production of cheese, butter, and milk, and the growing of oats and potatoes (Emerson 1898).
The Town of Worth was formed in April 1848 from the Town of Lorraine, and named in honor of General William J. Worth, who was commanded troops at Sackets Harbor during the Patriot War. In 1850 the town had a population of 320; by 1880 it had risen to 951, its nineteenth century maximum (Emerson 1989). At the end of the nineteenth century, the hamlet of Worthville supported three stores, the Worthville hotel, S.B. Kellogg’s saw and grist mills, A.B. Gillet’s sawmill, Monroe Bullock’s cheese factory, and N.H. Hyde’s blacksmith shop (Emerson 1898). The population of the Town of Worth in 2010 was 231, decreasing from 234 in 2000.
2.2 HISTORICAL MAPS
Three historic period maps were reviewed for the current project area (Ligowski 1857; Beers and Beers 1864 [Figure 2.3]; Beers 1875 [Figure 2.2]; Robinson 1888 [Figure 2.4]) and a variety of USGS (1905 [Figure 2.5], 1905 [Figure 2.5], 1909 [Figure 5]).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-8 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 2.2a. The approximate location of the project area (between red lines) in the Town of Pinckney in 1875 (Beers 1875).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-9 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 2.2b. The approximate location of the project area (to the left of the red line) in the Town of Harrisburg in 1875 (Beers 1875).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-10 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 2.2c. The approximate location of the project area (in red) in the Town of Montague in 1875 (Beers 1875).
Figure 2.3. The approximate location of the project area (to the right of the red line) in the Town of Rodman in 1864 (Beers and Beers 1864). Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-11 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 2.4. The approximate location of the project area (to the right of the red line) in the Town of Rodman in 1888 (Robinson 1888).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-12 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Figure 2.5. The approximate location of the project area in Lewis and Jefferson counties in the early 1900s (USGS 1904, 1905, 1909).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 2-13 Deer River Wind Farm Phase 1A
3.0 Methodology
The visual Area of Potential Effect (APE) study area is defined as the entire area within a five-mile distance around the outer ring of proposed turbine locations (see Figure 1.1; Appendix A). The visual APE consists of the areas from which the proposed undertaking may be visible within the five-mile visual APE study area (see Appendix A). Within this area both direct and indirect visual effects are assessed that may cause changes in the character or use of cultural properties. Panamerican generated the viewshed analysis map of the five-mile visual APE, which is based on topography and a turbine height of 591 ft (180 m), which was chosen at the request of the client to represent the worse-case option scenario (NYSHPO 2006; see the architectural history investigation results map in Appendix A). Additional screening may be provided by structures and vegetation. The positive visual APE spans northwestern Lewis County and a small portion of northeastern Jefferson County.
3.1 NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA
For a building or structure to be considered eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), it must be evaluated within its historic context and shown to be significant for one or more of the four Criteria of Evaluation (36 CFR 60) as outlined in How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Bulletin 15, NPS 2002). All structures examined as part of this investigation were identified and evaluated in the field with reference to these criteria:
Criterion A: (Event) Properties that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
Criterion B: (Person) Properties that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
Criterion C: (Design/Construction) Properties that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
Criterion D: (Information Potential) Properties that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (NPS Bulletin 15, referencing 36 CFR 60).
A property is not eligible if it cannot be related to a particular time period or cultural group and thereby lacks any historic context with which to evaluate the importance of the cultural resource. The cultural property (e.g., historic structure or landscape) must also retain the historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance. Seven aspects or qualities of integrity recognized by the National Register are location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (NPS 2002). Actual determinations of eligibility are made by the Field Services Bureau of the NYSHPO.
3.2 ASSESSMENT OF ADVERSE EFFECTS TO HISTORIC PROPERTIES
In general, an undertaking has an effect on an historic property when the undertaking may alter characteristics of the property that may qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register. The assessment of adverse effects to historic properties is spelled out in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as well as in 36 CFR 800.5.
(1) Criteria of adverse effect. An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Consideration shall be given to Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 3-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that may have been identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property's eligibility for the National Register. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance or be cumulative.
(2) Examples of adverse effects. Adverse effects on historic properties include, but are not limited to:
(i) Physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property; (ii) Alteration of a property, including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation and provision of handicapped access, that is not consistent with the Secretary’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68) and applicable guidelines; (iii) Removal of the property from its historic location; (iv) Change of the character of the property’s use or of physical features within the property's setting that contribute to its historic significance; (v) Introduction of visual, atmospheric or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property's significant historic features; (vi) Neglect of a property which causes its deterioration, except where such neglect and deterioration are recognized qualities of a property of religious and cultural significance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization; and (vii) Transfer, lease, or sale of property out of Federal ownership or control without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term reservation of the property's historic significance [36 CFR 800.5].
Visual Effects. By definition, a visual effect occurs whenever a proposed undertaking will be visible from an historic property. The mere existence of a visual effect does not automatically imply that the effect is adverse. An adverse visual effect occurs only when the addition of a new element to a landscape is found to diminish those aspects of a property’s significance and integrity, such as its historic setting, which make it eligible for the National Register.
Adverse visual effects are generally of two types, aesthetic or obstructive. An adverse aesthetic effect transpires when an undertaking’s visual effect has a negative impact upon the perceived beauty or artistic values of an historic structure or landscape, thereby diminishing the appreciation or understanding of the resource. Common examples of adverse aesthetic impacts include the diminution or elimination of open space, or the introduction of a visual element that is incompatible, out of scale, in great contrast, or out of character with the historic resource or its associated setting. An adverse obstructive effect occurs when the proposed undertaking blocks any part of an historic property, or eliminates scenic views historically visible from the property.
Per the NYSHPO wind guidelines, the APE for visual impacts on historic properties for wind projects is defined as those areas within five miles of proposed turbines which are within the potential viewshed (based on topography) of the project (NYSHPO 2006; see Section 6). The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) defines Visual Impact as:
when the mitigating effects of perspective do not reduce the visibility of an object to insignificant levels. Beauty plays no role in this concept. A visual impact may also be considered in the context of contrast. For instance, all other things being equal, a blue object seen against an orange background has greater visual impact than a blue object seen against the same colored blue background. Again, beauty plays no role in this concept [NYSDEC 2000:10-11].
The analysis takes into consideration the resource’s geographical distance and the effect of vegetation, and other landscape features that may screen or minimize views of the project from historic resources. Recommendations for mitigation options will also be included in the report (see Section 5).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 3-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
3.3 PROJECT CONSULTATION
State. Panamerican previously submitted a Phase 1A cultural resources investigation for the project to NYSHPO in September 2017 (Longiaru et al. 2017a). The purpose of the Phase 1A investigation was to determine if any previously recorded cultural resources were present within the project APE and to assess general sensitivity for archaeological and historic architectural resources.1 The project layout and specific project component locations were not available at the time of the submittal of the Phase 1A report. The report only included a project map showing the five-mile visual APE buffer and locations of existing S/NRHP-Listed (S/NRL) resources, individual S/NRHP-Eligible (S/NRE) resources, and those resources with an “Undetermined” S/NRHP status in CRIS. Photographs of the overall setting of the project were presented in the Phase 1A report.
In October 2017, prior to initiating the historic resources survey, Panamerican consulted with the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (OPRHP [NYSHPO]) Survey & Evaluation Unit to discuss the Project and the survey methodology. Per OPRHP request, Panamerican submitted a Work Plan for conducting the five-mile radius survey of areas that have not been surveyed within the visual APE of previous windfarm projects.
With guidance from OPRHP staff, the current study adhered to the following survey methodology:
Assess all buildings 50 years old or older within the five-mile visual APE study area that have not been surveyed within the visual APE of previous windfarm projects;
Determine potential State and National Register eligibility of each resource using the National Register Criteria for Evaluation;
Identify previously determined NRE resources without GIS data in the visual APE, if possible;
Identify and survey/evaluate resources with "Undetermined" NRHP status without GIS data in the visual APE (viewshed), if possible; and
Provide updated photographs of existing NRE resources in the visual APE that have not been recently surveyed for adjacent wind farm studies.
3.4 PREVIOUS HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES SURVEYS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
Four wind-energy projects have either been constructed or proposed in the vicinity of the project: Maple Ridge, Roaring Brook, Copenhagen, and Number Three (see Figure 1.2). Maple Ridge Wind Farm is currently the only operational wind facility in Lewis County. Historic architectural resource surveys have been completed for all four of the wind-energy facilities (Maple Ridge, Roaring Brook, Copenhagen, and Number Three). These previous five-mile visual APE surveys share significant overlap with the Deer River Wind Farm visual APE study area. The previous surveys identified S/NRL, S/NRE resources, and newly surveyed historic resources that were determined S/NRE by NYS OPRHP.
3.5 SURVEY METHODS
Background Review. Panamerican accessed OPRHP’s CRIS to identify previously inventoried historic resources and historic districts located within a five-mile buffer around the project. The results of the previous CRIS search as presented in the Phase 1A report were analyzed and revised to reflect the current five-mile visual APE. Background research included review of previous cultural resources studies in the study area, county and town histories, and related online sources and websites. Maps consulted include the following: 1855 Jefferson County, New York (Levey); 1857 Topographical Map of Lewis
1 Panamerican also conducted a separate Phase 1B archaeological investigation (see Hanley et. al 2018). Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 3-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
County (Ligowsky); 1864 Topographical Map of Jefferson County (Beers); 1875 Atlas of Lewis Co., New York (Beers); and selected USGS topographic maps (1904-1985).
Historic Resources Survey. The field survey was conducted in December 2017 and October 2018. Prior to the field investigations, all areas within the current visual APE located in overlapping sections of previous investigations were examined to isolate any locations requiring new survey investigation. Panamerican conducted the field survey from public roads to evaluate the National Register eligibility of resources in the visual APE. GIS data, building information, and photographs were collected using the CRIS Trekker Application. Supplemental digital photographs also were taken during the survey. Property locations and street addresses were cross-referenced with parcel data available on the Jefferson County Parcel & GIS Search (Jefferson County 2018), Lewis County GIS Mapping Web Application (Lewis County 2018a), Lewis County Real Property Search (Lewis County 2018b), and Google Earth.
For newly surveyed resources, the following information was obtained: location, architectural style; physical characteristics; building materials; integrity of the resource and its setting; current/historic use; and other defining features. The visual inspection of resources was limited to the visible exterior of the buildings and the overall setting of the property. Many of the resources in the study area included numerous farm buildings and agricultural landscape features that are not fully visible from the right-of- way. Additional information was obtained from the Jefferson County and Lewis County Real Property websites and Google Earth.
A majority of existing S/NRE resources were surveyed in 2017 (Number Three Wind Farm [Longiaru et al. 2017b]) and 2014 (Copenhagen Wind Farm [edr 2014]). The visual APEs for both of these studies encompassed the Village of Copenhagen, the largest community in the current study area. As such, Copenhagen was not re-surveyed for the Deer River study (Longiaru 2017; see Section 3.3 above). Further, these two earlier studies also re-evaluated resources that were documented at least ten years ago as part of the Maple Ridge Wind Farm survey. Only general property information was collected for the existing S/NRE resources (i.e., location, photograph, current street address, date of construction) in those areas that overlap with the Deer River visual APE.
The results of the five-mile visual APE survey are enumerated in Tables 4.1 (see Section 4.0). The locations of S/NRL, S/NRE, and newly identified resources in the study area are indicated on the architectural survey project map (see Appendix A). An annotated list of surveyed properties is presented in Appendix B.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 3-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
4.0 Historic Resources Survey Results
The results of the historic resources survey for the Deer River Wind Farm five-mile visual APE are summarized below by municipality and presented in Table 4.1. The total number of historic resources in the five-mile visual APE by S/NRHP status is listed below and includes resources identified during previous five-mile visual APE surveys within the overlap areas with this project’s five-mile visual APE.
State/National Register Listed (S/NRL) resources: 1 Existing State/National Register Eligible (S/NRE) (Individual) resources: 202 Recommended S/NRE (Individual) resources: 12 Recommended State/National Register eligibility status “Undetermined”: 93 Recommended Not Eligible for listing in State/National Register: 2
The locations of S/NRL and S/NRE resources in the study area are indicated on the architectural survey project map (see Appendix A). An annotated list of surveyed properties is presented in Appendix B.
4.1 JEFFERSON COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES
Town of Champion (MCD 04506). One previously determined S/NRE (individual) resource—South Champion Cemetery (Unique Site Number [USN] 04506.000057)—is in the section of the Town of Champion in the visual APE. There are no NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE.
No new historic resources were identified in the Town of Champion.
Town of Rodman (MCD 04517). One previously determined S/NRE (individual) resource—Thomas Kostoroski Property (USN 04517.000004)—is in the section of the Town of Rodman in the visual APE. However, the exact location of this property is unknown as there is no GIS data in CRIS except for the name of the road, Williams Road (CRIS 2018). No resources were identified on Williams Road that appeared to be S/NRE. The location of this property remains unknown. There are no S/NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE.
Ten unevaluated previously inventoried resources are in the section of the Town of Rodman in the visual APE. Most of these resources are located in the hamlets of Zoar and Rodman. One resource Schoolhouse No. 13 (USN 04517.000017: Zoar Road; southeast corner at Freeman Creek Road) is no longer extant.
The current study recommends seven individual unevaluated resources in Rodman as S/NRE (see Appendix A).
Gulf Stream-Isham Cemetery (USN 04517.000005) William Y. Isham House (USN 04517.000009) East Rodman Cemetery (USN 04517.000013) Zoar Cemetery (USN 04517.000014) Fairview Cemetery (USN 04517.000018) Fairview Cemetery Chapel (USN 04517.000019 Crandall Hill Cemetery(USN 04517.000025)
2 Note, there are six other existing individual S/NRE resources in the study area but not in the visual APE. These properties are identified on the project map in Appendix A. 3 Unevaluated previously inventoried resources are identified in OPRHP CRIS as “undetermined.” Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Note, only the northeastern portion of the hamlet of Zoar is in the study area. The individual residential buildings identified in CRIS as “Undetermined” do not appear to retain sufficient architectural integrity for consideration as an individual S/NRE resource. However, these residences might be contributing resources to a historic district in Zoar which would require further survey work that is beyond the scope of the current study.
Town of Rutland (MCD 04518). One previously determined S/NRE (individual) resource—Residence, Queen Anne (USN 04518.000044)—is in the section of Rodman in the visual APE. One other existing S/NRE individual resource—South Rutland Cemetery (USN 04517.000043/45)—is within the five-mile buffer study area but not in the visual APE. There are no S/NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE.
No new historic resources were identified in the Town of Rutland.
Town of Watertown (MCD 04520). One previously determined S/NRE (individual) resource in the Town of Watertown—Building at 25516 SR 12 (USN 04520.000043)—is within five-mile buffer study area but not in the visual APE. There are no S/NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE.
No new historic resources were identified in the Town of Watertown.
Town of Worth (MCD 04522). There are no existing S/NRL resources, no existing S/NRE resources or previously identified historic districts in the section of the Town of Worth in the visual APE.
The current study recommends two resources as S/NRE (individual) in the Town of Worth:
Worthville Cemetery (USN 04522.000003) Rising Cemetery on Loomis Road
4.2 LEWIS COUNTY MUNICIPALITIES
Town of Denmark (MCD 04902). There are no existing S/NRL resources, no existing S/NRE resources or previously identified historic districts in the section of the Town of Denmark in the visual APE. Three unevaluated previously inventoried resources are noted on NY 12 and CR 194 in Denmark, but the locations of these resources are unknown.
No new historic resources were identified in the Town of Denmark.
Town of Harrisburg (MCD 04905). Two previously determined S/NRE (individual) resources—St. Patrick’s Cemetery (Battle Cemetery [USN 04905.000036]) and Gallup Cemetery (USN 04905.000038)— are in the section of the Town of Harrisburg in the visual APE. There are no S/NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE. The location of one unevaluated previously inventoried resource is unknown (USN 04905.000003).
No new historic resources were identified in the Town of Harrisburg.
Town of Montague (MCD 04912). One previously determined S/NRE (individual) resource—Gardner Corners Cemetery (USN 04912.000066)—is in the section of the Town of Montague in the visual APE. There are no S/NRL resources or previously identified historic districts in the visual APE.
One newly identified architectural resource is recommended as S/NRE (individual) in the Town of Montague: Liberty Cemetery on the east side of Liberty Road north of Factory Road (see Appendix A).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Town of Pinckney (MCD 04915). One S/NRL resource—Pinckney Corners Cemetery (USN 04915.000034)—is in the section of the Town of Pinckney in the visual APE. No new historic resources were identified in Pinckney. One S/NRE resource—Grange Hall (Saints Peter & Paul Parish Hall [USN 04915.000005])—is in the visual APE. Three unevaluated previously inventoried resources are in the visual APE. Two of which were not located in the field (USN 04915.000002 and USN 04915.000003). One other resource with a S/NRHP “Undetermined” status is a former Cheese Factory (USN 04915.000015). Further visual inspection and research is recommended in the future to evaluate the former cheese factory’s S/NRHP eligibility. One newly identified resource—New Boston Cemetery on the south side of NY 177 east of McDonald Road—is located on private property and is not visible from the public right-of-way. The resource is identified on the project survey map with an “Undetermined” S/NRHP status (see Appendix A).
Two architectural resources are recommended as S/NRE (individual) in the Town Pinckney (see Appendix A):
Barnes Corners Cemetery on Barnes Corners Road / CR 194; south side, east of Whitesville Road / CR 21 Saints Peter & Paul’s Cemetery on NY 177; north side, east of McDonald Road
Village of Copenhagen (MCD 04943).4 Twelve individual S/NRE resources are located in the section of the Village of Copenhagen in the five-mile buffer study area. Three of which are not located in the visual APE. Two historic districts with “Undetermined” S/NRHP” statuses are in the visual APE in the Village of Copenhagen: Copenhagen Village Historic District North (USN 04943.000099) and Copenhagen Village Historic District South (USN 04943.000098). Four individual S/NRE resources are located in the Copenhagen Village Historic District North (USN 04943.000099). Seven individual S/NRE resources are located in the Copenhagen Village Historic District South (USN 04943.000098), four of which are not in the visual APE. Five unevaluated previously inventoried resources are in the visual APE. Two other individual S/NRE resources are located in the village outside of the unevaluated historic districts (USN 04943.000091 and USN 04943.000096). There are no S/NRL resources in Copenhagen.
No new historic resources were identified in the Village of Copenhagen.
4 Previously surveyed architectural resources in the Village of Copenhagen were not revaluated as per the Project methodology presented in the Work Plan submitted to NYS OPRHP (see Section 3.3 for this report). Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Table 4.1. Resources in the Deer River Wind Farm Five-Mile Visual APE Study Area. Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status Jefferson County 04506.000057 South Champion NY 12; northeast Champion Eligible Eligible In overlap survey area Cemetery corner at Switzer Road 04517.000005 Gulf Stream-Isham Creek Road; southeast Rodman (h), Undetermined Eligible Other names: Isham’s or Cemetery side at Sandy Creek Rodman Brookside Cemetery 04517.000009 William Y. Isham House 2107 CR 69 (Creek Rodman (h), Undetermined Eligible Road) Rodman 04517.000013 East Rodman Cemetery CR 156; east side, at East Rodman (h) Undetermined Eligible Cramer Road Rodman 04517.000014 Zoar Cemetery Zoar Road/CR 68; east Zoar (h), Undetermined Eligible side, approx. 0.15-mi Rodman north of Pork Hill Road 04517.000015 Fassett House CR 61 Zoar (h), Undetermined Not Eligible Does not meet NRHP Rodman criteria. 124 Sandy Valley Creek Road on 1981 Inventory Form 04517.000017 Schoolhouse No. 13 Zoar Road; southeast Rodman Undetermined Not Eligible- corner at Freeman DEMOLISHED Creek Road (town line) 04517.000018 Fairview Cemetery Cemetery Road; east Rodman Undetermined Eligible side, between NY 177 & Williams Rosd 04517.000019 Fairview Cemetery Cemetery Road: east Rodman Undetermined Eligible Chapel side, between NY 177 & Williams Road 04517.000025 Crandall Hill Cemetery Freeman Creek Road; Rodman Undetermined Eligible (Freeman Creek south side, west of Cemetery) Hamp Road 04517.000026 Frank K. Woolworth Whitford Road; west Rodman Undetermined Undetermined A filled-in cellar hole Birthplace Site side, opp. Smith Street according to 1981 inventory form. Revise CRIS field “Type” to Archaeology. 04517.000027 Moody House 23384 Smith Road Rodman Undetermined Undetermined Further visual inspection and research for a S/NRHP-eligibility evaluation for the ca. 1815- 1820 Federal style house.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status 04517.000029 Kenfield Kenfield Road Rodman Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no property details or GIS data in CRIS. Resource not located in the field. 04517.000040 Thomas Kostoroski Williams Road Rodman Eligible Eligible Location unknown; no Property property details or GIS data in CRIS. Resource not located in the field. No Kostoroski on Williams Road in Jefferson County Real Property data. 04517.000043/ South Rutland CR 69: southeast side, Rutland Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN 04517.000045 Cemetery east of CR 161 (no VISUAL APE parcel address) 04518.000044 Residence, Queen 16801 Churchill Road Rutland Eligible Eligible Anne 04520.000043 Building 25516 SR 12 Watertown Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL APE 04522.000003 Worthville Cemetery CR 189; north side, Worth (h), Worth Undetermined Eligible Worthville Cemetery approx. 0.2-mi west of located on CR 96 in CRIS. CR 96 n/a Rising Cemetery Loomis Rd; south side, Worth n/a Eligible southwest corner at CR 189 Lewis County 04902.000012 Farm n/a NY 12 Denmark Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no GIS data in CRIS. Resource not located in the field. In overlap survey area. 04902.000015 Structure A n/a NY 12 Denmark Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no property details or GIS data in CRIS. The section of NY 12 in current study Denmark is in the overlap area. 04902.000064 Residence 2213 Route 194 Denmark Undetermined Undetermined In overlap survey area.
04905.000003 Farm River Road Harrisburg Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no GIS data in CRIS. Resource not located in the field.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-5 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status 04905.000036 St. Patrick’s Cemetery 2813 Thesier Road Harrisburg Eligible Eligible In overlap survey area. (Battle Cemetery) 04905.000037/ Greek Revival 2952 Alexander Road Harrisburg Undetermined Undetermined In overlap survey area. 04905.000045 farmhouse (USN#45)/ Building has two USNs with Eligible #45 assigned with an (USN#37) "Undetermined" status and #37 assigned an "Eligible" status. In overlap survey area. A 2017 survey recommended this farmhouse as Not Eligible due to loss of integrity, poor condition. The building is abandoned, exposed to the elements, and deteriorating. 04905.000038 Gallup Cemetery 8735 NY 12 Harrisburg Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL APE In overlap survey area. 04912.000062 Sears Pond Dam Sears Pond Road Montague Undetermined Not Eligible- The wooden dam that held DEMOLISHED back millions of gallons of water has long since disappeared, leaving only remnants of a once locally important dam structure and water body. Possible historic site (see https://www.dec.ny.gov/lan ds/8005.html) 04912.000066 Gardner Corners Gardner Road; south Montague Eligible Eligible In overlap survey area. Cemetery side, 0.2-mi east of Sears Pond Road n/a Liberty Cemetery 7038 Liberty Road/ CR Montague n/a Eligible 23
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-6 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status 04915.000002 Structure #4 NY 177 at NY 177 Barnes Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no GIS Old State Road Corners(h), data in CRIS. Resource not Pinckney located in the field. Identified in CRIS as Structure #5. Note, resource identified in a NYSDOT survey, which is not available in CRIS. 04915.000003 Structure #5 NY 177 at NY 177 Barnes Undetermined Undetermined Location unknown; no GIS Old State Road Corners(h), data in CRIS. Resource not Pinckney located in the field. Identified in CRIS as Structure #5. Note, resource identified in a NYSDOT survey, which is not available in CRIS. 04915.000005 Grange Hall (Saints 309 NY 177 Barnes Eligible Eligible USN 04915.000005 Peter & Paul Parish Corners(h), identified in CRIS as Hall) Pinckney “Structure #7” with incorrect location description. Building form (dated 1990) is available in CRIS. 04915.000015 Former Cheese Factory 519 NY 177 Barnes Undetermined Undetermined In fair condition. Further Corners(h), evaluation and research Pinckney required. Identified in CRIS as Structure #17. Note this appears to be from a DOT survey, which is not available in CRIS. 04915.000029 Saints Peter & Paul’s 1110 NY 177 New Boston (h), Eligible Eligible Now a residence Church Pinckney 04915.000034 Pinckney Corners Pinckney Road; north Pinckney Listed; Listed; Cemetery side, approx. 0.14-mi Corners, 14PR03703 14PR03703 west of NY 194 Pinckney n/a Barnes Corners- Barnes Corners Road Barnes n/a Eligible Evergreen Cemetery (CR 194); south side, Corners(h), east of Whitesville Pinckney Road (CR 21) n/a Saints Peter & Paul 1021 NY 177 New Boston (h), n/a Eligible Cemetery Pinckney
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-7 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status n/a New Boston Cemetery NY 177; south side, New Boston (h), n/a Undetermined No access--private east of McDonald Pinckney property. Cemetery not Road visible from road. Identified on USGS topo map. 04943.000003 Former WCTU / Church No address Copenhagen5 Undetermined Undetermined In overlap survey area. Building 04943.000050 Lago House, Structure 9784 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL T APE. In Copenhagen Village Historic District South boundaries. 04943.000051 St. Mary's Church 9790 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL APE. In Copenhagen Village Historic District South boundaries. 04943.000053 The Cottage Inn 9794 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL APE. In Copenhagen Village Historic District South boundaries. 04943.000054 Monument Park (Civil 9843 NY 12, at Copenhagen Eligible Eligible NOT LOCATED IN VISUAL War) Cataract Street APE. In Copenhagen Village Historic District South boundaries. 04943.000055 Structure X 9854 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In Copenhagen Village Historic District South boundaries. 04943.000057 Structure X2 10005 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In Copenhagen Village Historic District North boundaries. 04943.000074/ Structure F2; United 9932 NY 12 Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined The resource has two 04943.000101 Church of Copenhagen USNs: #74-“Eligible” and #101- “Undetermined.” The higher USN is the current S/NRHP Status. In Copenhagen Village Historic District North boundaries. 04943.000075 Structure K2 9972 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In Copenhagen Village Historic District North boundaries.
5 All resources in the Village of Copenhagen are in the five-mile buffer overlap area with previous surveys. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-8 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status 04943.000076 Structure L2 9978 NY 12 Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In Copenhagen Village Historic District North boundaries. 04943.000079/ Copenhagen Village Main Street/NY 12 Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined Historic district has two 04943.000098 Historic District South USNs: #79-“Eligible” and #98 “Undetermined.” The higher USN is the current S/NRHP Status. 04943.000080/ Copenhagen Village NY 12 Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined Historic district has two 04943.000099 Historic District North USNs: #80-“Eligible”and #99-“Undetermined.” The higher USN is the current S/NRHP Status. Partially located in visual APE. 04943.000082 Building 110 High Street Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In boundaries of Copenhagen Village Historic District South. High Street name changed to NY 12. Street name update not reflected in CRIS for Nos. 110, 114, 116, and 122 High Street.
04943.000083 Building 122 High Street Copenhagen Eligible Eligible In boundaries of Copenhagen Village Historic District South. High Street name changed to NY 12. Street name update not reflected in CRIS for Nos. 110, 114, 116, and 122 High Street. 04943.000084 Building 116 High Street Eligible Eligible In boundaries of Copenhagen Village Historic District South. High Street name changed to NY 12. Street name update not reflected in CRIS for Nos. 110, 114, 116, and 122 High Street.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-9 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Current NYS OPRHP Town / Village / 2018 Survey Name Address S/NRHP Comment USN Hamlet Recommendation Status 04943.000085 114 High Street Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined In boundaries of Copenhagen Village Historic District South. High Street name changed to NY 12. Street name update not reflected in CRIS for Nos. 110, 114, 116, and 122 High Street. 04943.000091 Copenhagen Central 3020 Mechanic Street Copenhagen Eligible Eligible School Main Building 04943.000096 Residence 2968 Cataract Street Copenhagen Eligible Eligible 04943.000097/ Residence, frame 2963 Mechanic Street Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined Building has two USNs with 04943.000103 Greek Revival #97 assigned with an "Eligible" and #103 assigned "Undetermined" status. 04943.000103 Riverside Cemetery 3018 Cataract Street Copenhagen Undetermined Undetermined Previously surveyed in 2017 for Number Three Wind Energy Center.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 4-10 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
5.0 Visual Impacts to Architectural Resources
The study area is a five-mile radius around the proposed project turbines. The project is located in the towns of Harrisburg, Pinckney, and Montague, Lewis County. The project’s visual APE (five-mile study area) embraces portions of the towns of Denmark, Harrisburg Lowville, Martinsburg, Montague, Pinckney, and the Village of Copenhagen in Lewis County; and the towns of Champion, Rodman, Rutland, Watertown, and Worth in Jefferson County. The entire municipal boundaries of the village of Copenhagen are in the study area. The total study area for the current project layout is approximately 200+ sq miles, of which turbines are visible from 167.8 sq miles (83.9 percent of the study area). No structures or buildings will be demolished or physically altered in connection with the construction of the project. Access to the surrounding historical, recreational, and commercial land uses will not be impeded by the project.
The proposed transmission interconnection location for the project crosses into the Town of Rodman in Jefferson County. Since Article 10 defines an electric-generating facility to include the transmission interconnection point, the Town of Rodman is within the project area although no wind turbines are currently proposed for location in that municipality.
The definition of visual impacts has historically been conceptually problematic. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) defines Visual Impact as:
when the mitigating effects of perspective do not reduce the visibility of an object to insignificant levels. Beauty plays no role in this concept. A visual impact may also be considered in the context of contrast. For instance, all other things being equal, a blue object seen against an orange background has greater visual impact than a blue object seen against the same colored blue background Again, beauty plays no role in this concept [NYSDEC 2000:10-11].
However, the difficulty lies in defining insignificant levels or in determining the levels of contrast that have an effect. Further, at what level of contrast does the effect become adverse? In the overall assessment, the multivariate natures of the S/NRL and S/NRE properties in the visual APE (viewshed) can be considered to a limited degree. In many instances, the setting of the property contributes to its eligibility while in other cases, it is less so or not at all important. In this analysis, the level of effect (visibility and contrast) is measured on the dataset as a whole—the S/NRL and S/NRE (and potentially eligible) properties within the viewshed (see Table 4.1; Table 5.1).
Based on the provided information, it is apparent that the project will not greatly change the visible landscape of the region as a result of the currently operating Maple Ridge Wind Farm. The existing wind turbines in the area have created a distinct visual setting that integrates a wind-energy landscape within the county’s rural agricultural setting. The turbines will be unique and prominent visible features on the landscape in many locations where there are not or ever have been other types of vertical, man-made features. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-required lighting on some of the turbines will also be visible from many locations. While there may be some screening afforded by mature trees, shrubbery and other plantings during the growing season, the prominent features of the turbines will be visible during periods of dormancy.
Another method for illustrating the degree of visual impact is based on categories suggested by the U.S. Forest Service. In this framework, the project viewshed or visual APE is divided into zones of relative visibility based on geographical distance to the nearest turbine: Foreground (0-0.5 mile); Middle ground (0.5-3.0 miles); and Background (3.0 miles to horizon). Of the 46 historic properties identified in the visual APE (and whose locations are known), three are situated such that proposed turbines are in the visual foreground, nine are at locations where turbines would be in the visual middle ground, and 34 are situated such that proposed turbines are in the visual background (more than 3.0 miles from the structures) (see Table 5.1; see Appendix A—Locations of Architectural Resources within Five Miles of Project Location [Project Map]).
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 5-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
As noted, one operating wind-energy facility, Maple Ridge Wind Farm, is adjacent and near the project in the towns Harrisburg, Lowville, Martinsburg, and Watson. The average maximum height of Maple Ridge’s 195 wind-turbine generators is approximately 390 feet (120 m) at the maximum extension of a given blade. Portions of some of the Maple Ridge’s turbines are visible from some areas in the current project. In addition, other wind-energy facilities are proposed in the vicinity of the project (Copenhagen Wind Farm and Number Three Wind Farm). However, no data is currently available to estimate the total area within the five-mile visual APE in which wind turbines will be visible from these existing and proposed wind-energy projects.
Within or immediately adjacent to the proposed wind-project study area, electrical distribution lines, telephone poles, water towers, and other vertical, modern visual intrusions are present. Most of these modern intrusions, to a certain extent, may have compromised some historical settings. Existing modern visual intrusions are relatively small compared to the proposed 492-to-591-ft-tall wind turbines.
The proposed wind-energy project will be prominently sited in the towns of Harrisburg, Pinckney, and Montague. The most significant visual impacts will be on open farming land (rural agricultural landscapes), and any of the following that have open/clear views of the wind farm: historic properties on ridges, cemeteries, historic properties along major thoroughfares in the area, and at historic crossroads communities. The impacts to these resources vary with the surrounding topography, distance from the turbines, existing landscaping and vegetation, and surrounding land uses.
30
25
20
15
10 Number of historic properties of historic Number
5
0 0-1.0 1.01-2.0 2.01-3.0 3.01-4.0 >4.01 Distance to nearest turbine (miles)
Figure 5.1. Frequency of structures relative to distance to the nearest proposed wind turbine.
Below is a summary of visual impact findings for the previous historic architectural surveys completed for the proposed project:
One individual National Register-Listed resource is in the visual APE. There are 20 existing individual NRE architectural resources and 12 newly surveyed, recommended NRE properties in the visual APE.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 5-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
The number of turbines that can be seen from all properties documented within the five-mile APE (e.g., NHL, NRE and recommended NRE properties) spans the full range of values (see Table 4.1).
The mean number of turbines that are visible from an NRE property, however, is nine; the average distance from an NRL or NRE property to the nearest turbine is 3.04 miles (4.89 km; Figure 5.1). Table 5.1 presents the properties in the visual APE and the visual impacts of project turbines.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 5-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Table 5.1. Visual Impacts to Historic Properties in the Project Visual APE. Distance to Number of Nearest USN Town Address / Property name nearest turbine Turbines turbine (miles) Visible 04506.000057 Champion South Champion Cemetery E3 3.01 16 04943.000057 Copenhagen 10005 NY 12 D8 3.15 9 04943.000082 Copenhagen 110 High Street D8 3.03 0 04943.000085 Copenhagen 114 High Street D8 3.04 0 04943.000084 Copenhagen 116 High Street D8 3.04 0 04943.000083 Copenhagen 122 High Street D8 3.05 0 04943.000097 Copenhagen 2963 Mechanic Street D8 3.26 19 04943.000096 Copenhagen 2968 Cataract Street D8 3.25 19 04943.000055 Copenhagen 9854 NY 12 D8 3.12 17 04943.000091 Copenhagen Copenhagen Central School Main Building D8 2.94 12 04943.000050 Copenhagen Lago House / Structure T D8 3.05 0 04943.000054 Copenhagen Monument Park (Civil War) D8 3.11 17 04943.000103 Copenhagen Riverside Cemetery D8 3.54 19 04943.000051 Copenhagen St. Mary's Church D8 3.06 7 04943.000074 Copenhagen Structure F2 / United Church of Copenhagen D8 3.15 9 04943.000075 Copenhagen Structure K2 D8 3.16 17 04943.000076 Copenhagen Structure L2 D8 3.17 16 04943.000053 Copenhagen The Cottage Inn D8 3.09 0 04905.000037 Harrisburg 2952 Alexander Road D8 1.70 17 04943.000099 Copenhagen Copenhagen Village Historic District North D8 Ca. 3.2 2 to 17 04943.000098 Copenhagen Copenhagen Village Historic District South D8 Ca. 3.1 0 to 17 04905.000038 Harrisburg 8735 NY 12 D8 4.12 4 04905.000036 Harrisburg Battle Cemetery D9 1.58 18 04912.000066 Montague Gardner Corners Cemetery B7 2.70 15 Montague Liberty Cemetery A2 0.78 25 Pinckney Barnes Corner Cemetery B1 1.25 5
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 5-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Distance to Number of Nearest USN Town Address / Property name nearest turbine Turbines turbine (miles) Visible Pinckney New Boston Cemetery B4 0.45 25 04915.000015 Pinckney NY 177 B1 1.26 22 04915.000034 Pinckney Pinckney Corners Cemetery E3 0.70 23 Pinckney Saints Peter and Paul Cemetery B4 0.36 10 04915.000029 Pinckney St Peter and Paul Church B4 0.37 12 04517.000015 Rodman 124 Sandy Creek Valley Road C1 5.55 1 04517.000009 Rodman 2107 CR 69 C1 3.82 1 04517.000027 Rodman 23384 Smith Road C1 4.06 2 04517.000013 Rodman East Rodman Cemetery C1 2.18 10 04517.000018 Rodman Fairview Cemetery C1 3.96 2 04517.000019 Rodman Fairview Cemetery Chapel C1 3.95 1 04517.000025 Rodman Freeman Creek Cemetery C1 3.90 12 04517.000005 Rodman Isham Bridge Cemetery C1 4.82 2 04517.000017 Rodman Schoolhouse 113 C1 4.59 1 04517.000026 Rodman Whitford Road opposite Smith Road C1 4.15 13 04517.000014 Rodman Zoar Cemetery C1 4.42 1 04518.000044 Rutland 16801 Churchill Road E2 3.14 5 04520.000043 Watertown 25516 SR 12 D1 5.77 1 Worth Rising Cemetery C1 3.84 1 04522.000003 Worth Worth Cemetery C1 4.33 1
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 5-5 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
6.0 Mitigation of Visual Impacts
The results of the historic resources survey for the Deer River Wind Farm five-mile visual APE are summarized below by municipality and presented in Table 4.1. The total number of historic resources in the visual APE is listed below:
State/National Register Listed resources: 1 Existing State/National Register Eligible (Individual) resources: 206 Recommended State/National Register Eligible (Individual) resources: 12 Recommended State/National Register eligibility status “Undetermined”: 9
The number of turbines that can be seen from S/NRE properties spans the full range of values. The average number of turbines that can be seen from an NRE property is nine, with an average distance from an NRL/NRE property to the nearest turbine is 3.04 miles (4.89 km; see Figure 5.1). While some of these properties are grouped together within villages or hamlets, along roads or in associated complexes such as farmsteads, on the whole, the properties are widely dispersed across the area. As noted in Section 5.0, the impacts to these resources vary with the surrounding topography, distance from the turbines and electrical lines, existing landscaping and vegetation, and surrounding land uses.
Some screening will be afforded by mature trees, shrubs, and plantings for at least part of the year. This observation is especially true for buildings/structures in the areas surrounding streams and steep embankments. The topography of some portions of the five-mile visual APE will provide additional screening. Nevertheless, there are visual impacts to the area associated with the construction of the project that will require mitigation.
Atlantic Wind LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Avangrid Renewables, LLC, is obligated to mitigate adverse visual effects to NRE and NRL properties under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as well as to mitigate significant visual impacts under Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and 6NYCRR Part 617 as delineated in the NYSDEC Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts (2000). In the case of the Deer River Wind Farm, both Section 106 and NYSDEC mitigation were triggered by the same occurrence: the inclusion of NRE or potentially NRE properties within the project visual APE. NYSDEC lists specific mitigation strategies, while Section 106 does not; the two are not mutually exclusive, however, and strategies for each can have common characteristics.
The mitigation of visual effects to these properties presents an opportunity for a number of alternative mitigative strategies. The usual mitigative approaches can be applied; however, broader alternative strategies can encourage local community input and assist those communities through the undertaking of “hometown” cultural resource projects that are commonly in need of financial and professional assistance. The mitigative strategies below are grouped into several categories. These categories overlap; and some of the categories include the more traditional mitigative alternatives.
PROJECT CRITERIA
Atlantic Wind LLC proposes the following working criteria for any proposed “historical mitigation” project or activity. These criteria provide that the subject of any such project should:
1. Be consistent with the guidance of NYSHPO 2. Have historical significance 3. Serve a public historic purpose
6 There are six other existing S/NRE resources in the study area but not in the visual APE. These properties are identified on the project map in Appendix B. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 6-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
4. Be a good investment 5. Be appropriate to the state of preservation of local historical resources
PROFESSIONAL DESIGN AND SITING
NYSDEC considers a properly designed and sited project the best way to mitigate potential impacts. Deer River Wind Farm is designed to mitigate the visual impact of the turbines where practical. The color of the towers is a non-specular neutral white or off-white so the towers will blend into a white sky. The turbines are laid out in a random, natural pattern so that the flow of the landscape is not interrupted. Temporary access roads are only 35 feet (10.7 meters) wide; permanent access roads have not been established as yet.
For the Deer River Wind Farm, the height of the poles that will be used for the electrical lines connecting the turbines to each other and the existing substation for the Deer River Wind Farm range from 52.5 to 95 ft (16 to 29 m) above grade, or placed underground, or installed along existing power line rights-or-way where possible. Since the collection lines are average approximately 66 ft (20 m) tall (the mode is 61.5 ft [18.8 m]), some screening will be afforded by mature trees, shrubs and plantings for at least part of the year. The overhead lines will likely run through forested areas and over open fields in Lowville and Harrisburg. In part, the utility poles will not extend above the natural canopy.
MAINTENANCE
NYSDEC considers the maintenance of buildings/structures and landscapes and the decommissioning of objects or buildings/structures as part of a mitigation strategy. Proper maintenance prevents “eyesores” and is an integral part of Atlantic Wind LLC’s plan for the wind farm.
Local laws require a decommissioning plan to be put into place to remove obsolete and unused turbines. The plan will include cost estimates for the removal of towers and the reclamation of the areas including concrete foundations, access roads, seeding and re-vegetation and salvage of various materials.
SURVEYS
The completion of various types of surveys is a more traditional form of Section 106 mitigation; nevertheless it can also be used as a type of “offset” as described by NYSDEC. An “offset” is the correction of an existing aesthetic problem identified within a Zone Visual Influence (i.e., viewshed) as compensation for project impacts.
A Historic Resources Survey is the principal tool for identifying historic properties and placing them in the local, state and/or national historic context. Surveys provide an inventory of the built environment by systematically documenting historic properties by geographic location or theme. Further consultation with NYSHPO, and coordination with the Jefferson County and Lewis County historical societies would be required to determine the scope of work for a historic resources survey (e.g., type of survey [reconnaissance/intensive], survey methodology, level of documentation, etc.).
The Historic Resources Survey would aid communities in the following: establishing priorities for preservation projects; identification of historic properties that may benefit from National Register listing (which can qualify properties for certain tax credit and grant programs) and/or local designation; increase public awareness and appreciation for properties that reflect local, state, and national history; and gather information for educational and promotional purposes.
Other types of surveys for consideration can include:
Update the county’s GIS mapping of its cultural resources within the affected area Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 6-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Conduct surveys identifying specific architectural styles and types of buildings, structures and landscapes within the counties, towns, villages and hamlets affected by the project Listing of S/NRE sites/buildings/structures/objects/districts/landscapes in the area to the National Register (i.e. National Register nominations) Completing formal recordation documents (e.g., Historic American Buildings Survey [HABS], Historic American Engineering Record [HAER], Historic American Landscape Survey [HALS]) for the power houses/dams as well as sites, buildings, structures, landscapes that have been identified but never completed within the APE.
MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS
The creation of a pool of funds overseen by a third party is a less traditional, but effective way of offsetting project impacts.
Establish a monetary fund, with NYSHPO oversight, to initiate an historic landscape preservation program to support the preservation of historic landscapes in New York State. The introduction of such a program would offer technical assistance to municipalities and not-for-profit organizations to increase awareness of historic landscapes in New York State. Establish a cemetery maintenance program that can disburse funds to maintain the many small historic cemeteries in the area. Provide funds to town historian’s office to collect and archive local historical records, including photographs. Donations to libraries in the affected area for purchase of local and Lewis and Jefferson County material. Create a Historic Property Visual Mitigation Grant Fund for use by the owners of historic structures affected by the project. Funds from grants would be used to purchase onsite screening or make repairs to affected historic structures. The details of oversight, submission protocols, and eligibility will be negotiated with the NYSHPO.
HERITAGE TOURISM
The creation of Heritage Tourism materials has become an important part of municipalities, regions, and states promotional activities. These materials can be easily used by many individuals and widely distributed. Most of the activities listed below fall within the traditional Section 106 mitigation sphere, and all can be used as offset.
10-Minute Video Presentation. A video presentation can be used in schools, for presentations to civic groups, and on public access television. Brochure. A brochure highlighting historic architecture can be distributed at public libraries, visitor’s centers, etc., within the affected area. Develop local history website(s) to expand on digital historical record and online research. Posters. Posters can be produced highlighting the area and its history. Driving/Walking tours. Tours can be conducted out of the public library, visitor’s centers, etc., within the affected area. Exhibit. Exhibits focusing on history and architecture can be set up in libraries, visitor’s centers, town halls, etc., within the affected area. Power-Point Presentation. This can be used in schools, for presentations to civic groups within the affected area
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 6-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Educational activities have a broad appeal and can target a wide age group. Activities for school-age groups can help raise awareness of cultural resources within the community at an early age and engender excitement within the school system. Educational activities of various types are traditional Section 106 mitigation options; however, the creation of a graphic novel is a twist on this traditional use. The items below are also excellent offset activities.
Grade Appropriate Lesson Plans. Packages can include teacher information, student activities, and possible field trips, long- and short-term class projects centered on the affected area and distributed via Internet. Graphic Novel (comic book) about the history of the area. Host Public History Day. A special event can be staged in conjunction with schools and chambers of commerce within the affected area
HISTORY ACTIVITIES
Activities related to historic resources are the most traditional of Section 106 mitigation strategies. Nevertheless, they can be useful and an important offset activity.
Popular Written History of the County. Produce a document highlighting specific county contributions to state and country history, addressing the towns, villages and hamlets within the affected area. Historic Brochure and/or series of brochures addressing various aspects of the county’s, town’s, village’s and hamlet’s history within the affected area. Oral History Project. Placing Historic Markers. Creation of Context/s. Produce historical/architectural histories and contexts specific to the area, particularly a regional farming context.
Local community input is vital to the success of any mitigation strategy. Local historians, town officials, and agencies will be contacted by Atlantic Wind LLC to begin the process of determining community needs. NYSHPO staff will also play a major role in this process. This investigation of probable community needs is preliminary at best and in no way represents a final accounting of those needs.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 6-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
7.0 References
Aldenderfer, Mark S., Frank S. Schieppati, Eric Hansen, Kirk Butterbaugh, and Kathy Allen 1982 A Cultural Resource Predictive Model of the Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River Shoreline. Reports of the Archaeological Survey 14(6). Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Beers, Daniel G. 1875 Atlas of Lewis County, New York. Pomeroy, Whitmany, and Company, Philadelphia.
Beers, S.N., and D.G. Beers 1864 New Topographical Atlas of Jefferson Co. New York. C.K. Stone, Philadelphia.
Blau, Harold, Jack Campisi, and Elisabeth Tooker 1978 Onondaga. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 491-499. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Brasser, T.J. 1978 Early Indian-European Contacts. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 78-88. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Campisi, Jack 1978 Oneida. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 481-490. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Child, Hamilton 1890 Gazetteer of Jefferson County, N.Y. from A Prism of Memories of Jefferson County, New York; Shirley Farone’s Home Page, np. Electronic document, http://jefferson.nygenweb.net/childs.htm, accessed November 26, 2018.
Churchill, John C. (ed.). 1895 Landmarks of Oswego County, New York. D. Mason & Company, Syracuse.
Dill, David B., Jr. 1990 The Audacity of Macomb’s Purchase. Watertown Daily Times, September 23, Watertown, NY. From "Portrait of an Opportunist: The Life of Alexander Macomb." By David B. Dill, Jr., Watertown Daily Times. September 9, 16, 23, 1990. Articles collected by Marshall Davies Lloyd. Electronic documents, http://mlloyd.org/gen/macomb/text/amsr/wt.htm, accessed November 27, 2018.
Dixon, Nancy. 2018 Jefferson County New York GENWEB site. Electronic database, https://jefferson.nygenweb.net/, accessed November 27, 2018. edr Companies (edr) 2013 Phase 1A Cultural Resources Survey Copenhagen Wind Farm Town of Denmark, Lewis County, and Towns of Champion, Rutland, and Watertown, Jefferson County, New York. Environmental Design & Research, Landscape Architecture, Engineering, & Environmental Services, DPC, Syracuse, NY. Prepared for Own Energy, Brooklyn, NY.
2014 Phase 1B Archeological Survey Copenhagen Wind Farm Town of Denmark, Lewis County, and Towns of Champion and Rutland, Jefferson County, New York. Environmental Design & Research, Landscape Architecture, Engineering, & Environmental Services, DPC, Syracuse, NY. Prepared for Own Energy, Brooklyn, NY.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-1 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Ellis, David M. 1991 The Yankee Invasion of New York, 1783-1850. In Coming and Becoming; Pluralism in New York State History, compiled by Wendell Tripp, pp. 105-120. New York State Historical Association, Cooperstown, NY.
Ellis, David M., James A. Frost, Harold C. Syrett, and Harry J. Carmen 1967 A History of New York State. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
Emerson, Edgar C., editor 1898 Our County and Its People; A Descriptive Work on Jefferson County, New York. Boston History Company, Publishers, Boston.Rays Place Explore New England’s Past website. Electronic database, http://history.rays-place.com/ny/cty-lewis.htm, accessed January 4, 2017.
ESRI 2016 15m TerraColor aerial photography.
Goebel, Julius, Jr., and Joseph H. Smith, eds 1980 The Law Practice of Alexander Hamilton; Documents and Commentary. Volume IV. Columbia University Press, New York and London.
Hanley, Robert J., Mark A. Steinback, Edwin W. Button, and Michael A. Cinquino 2018 Phase 1B Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed Deer River Wind Farm, Towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, and Montague, Lewis County, New York. NYSHPO #17PR05791. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Buffalo branch, Buffalo. Prepared for Stantec, Topsham, ME.
Heaton, Patrick J., and Joel I. Klein 2002 Phase 1A Cultural Resources Investigation Flat Rock Wind Power Project, Towns of Harrisburg, Martinsburg, and Lowville, Lewis County, New York. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on- Hudson, NY. Prepared for Environmental Design and Research, P.C., Syracuse, NY, and Flat Rock Wind Power, LLC, Lowville, NY.
Historical Association of South Jefferson 2013 Town of Rodman. Electronic document, http://hasjny.tripod.com/id9.html, accessed November 25, 2018.
Hough, Franklin B. 1860 History of Lewis County, in the State of New York, from the Beginning of its Settlement to the Present Time. Munsell & Rowland, Albany, NY,
1883 History of Lewis County, 1803-1883. D. Mason & Co., Syracuse
Jefferson County Real Property 2018 Parcel & GIS Search. Electronic database, http://www.co.jefferson.ny.us/index.aspx?page=224.
John Milner Associates, Inc. (JMA) 2003 Stage I Cultural Resources Survey Flat Rock Wind Power Project Towns of Harrisburg, Martinsburg, and Lowville, Lewis County, New York. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on- Hudson, NY. Prepared for Flat Rock Wind Power, LLC, Lowville, NY. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on-Hudson, NY.
2004 Historic Architectural Resources Survey Flat Rock Wind Power Project Towns of Harrisburg, Martinsburg, and Lowville ,Denmark, Greig, High Market, Montague, Pinckney, Turin, Watson and the Villages of Lowville and Copenhagen, Lewis County, New York. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on-Hudson, NY. Prepared for Flat Rock Wind Power, LLC, Lowville, NY. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on-Hudson, NY.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-2 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
2007 Roaring Brook Wind Farm Historic Architectural Survey Towns of Harrisburg, West Turin, Lowville, Martinsburg, Montague, and Osceola in Lewis County, New York. John Milner Associates, Inc., Croton-on-Hudson, NY. Prepared for Roaring Brook Wind Power, LLC, Lowville, NY.
Johnson, Crisfield 1877 History of Oswego County, New York. L.H. Everts and Co., Philadelphia.
Kastl. Richard A., and Cynthia Carrington Carter 2012 Cultural Resource Management Report Phase I Cultural Resource Reconnaissance Survey Replacement of BIN 3338820 CR 156 over Sandy Creek, Town of Rodman, Jefferson County, New York. Public Archaeology Facility, Binghamton University, State University of New York.
Klein, Joel I., Cara Wise, Margaret M.W. Schaeffer, and Sydne B. Marshall 1985 An Archeological Overview and Management Plan for Fort Drum. Revised Draft. Envirosphere Company, New York. Prepared for the National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA.
Kula, Christina, Jean Farrand, and Richard Kastl 1989 Cultural Resource Management Survey, 1989 Highway Program PIN 7011.15.101, Route 177; CR 17 to CR 12 at West Lowville, Towns of Harrisburg and Lowville, Lewis County, New York. 2 vols. Public Archaeology Facility, State University of New York at Binghamton.
Lewis County Real Property 2018a GIS Mapping Web Application. Electronic database, http://lewiscountyny.org/content/generic/View/162, accessed November 26, 2018.
2018b Real Property Search. Electronic database, http://lewiscountyny.org/content/Generic/View/207, accessed November 26, 2018.
Longiaru, Christine M. 2017 Work Plan for the Five-mile Visual APE Architectural Resource Survey for the Proposed Deer River Wind Farm, Towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, and Montague, Lewis County (#17PR05791). Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Buffalo Branch, Buffalo.
Longiaru, Christine M., Robert J. Hanley, Mark A. Steinback, and Michael A. Cinquino 2017a Phase 1A Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed Deer River Wind Farm, Towns of Pinckney, Harrisburg, Lowville, and Montague, Lewis County, New York. New York State Historic Preservation Office #1#17PR05791. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Buffalo Branch, Buffalo. Prepared for Stantec, Topsham, ME.
2017b Phase 1A Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed Number Three Wind Farm, Towns of Harrisburg, Lowville, and Denmark, Lewis County, New York. New York State Historic Preservation Office #16PR06216. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Buffalo Branch, Buffalo. Prepared for Invenergy Wind LLC, Chicago.
Longiaru, Christine M., Mark A. Steinback, and Michael A. Cinquino 2016 Five-Mile Visual APE Architectural Resource Survey for the Proposed Number Three Wind Farm, Towns of Harrisburg, Lowville, and Denmark, Lewis County, New York. New York State Historic Preservation Office #16PR06216. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Buffalo Branch, Buffalo. Prepared for Invenergy Wind LLC, Chicago.
Meinig, D.W. 1966 Elaboration and Change, 1850's-1960's. In Geography of New York State, edited by John H. Thompson, pp. 172-196. Syracuse University Press, Syracuse.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-3 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Muscato, James A., and Laura K. Bomyea 2016 Public Involvement Plan Deer River Wind Farm Project, Lewis County and Jefferson Counties, New York, Case 16-F-0267. Young/Sommer LLC, Albany. Prepared for Atlantic Wind, LLC, Radnor, PA.
National Park Service 2002 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin 15. National Park Service, National Register, History and Education, U.S. Department of the Interior. Washington, D.C. Electronic document, http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/, accessed November 26, 2018.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 2000 Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany.
New York State Historic Preservation Office (NYSHPO) 2006 Guidelines for Wind Farm Development Cultural Resources Survey Work. New York State Historic Preservation Office, Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Peebles Island, Waterford.
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation (NYS OPRHP) 2018 Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS). Electronic database, https://cris.parks.ny.gov/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f, accessed November 2018.
NNY Genealogy 2014 Cemeteries By County Jefferson, Lewis, and Oswego Counties, New York. Electronic database, http://www.nnygenealogy.com/pages/cemetery/cemetery.php, accessed November 25, 2018.
Pilcher, Edith 1985 Castorland; French Refugees in the Western Adirondacks, 1793-1814. Harbor Hill Books, Harrison, NY.
Powell, Thomas F. 1976 Penet’s Square, an Episode in the Early History of Northern New York. North Country Books, Lakemont, NY.
Pratt, Peter P., and Marjorie K. Pratt 2007 Phase 1 Cultural Resource Survey NYJEF019-Route 177 Cell Tower, Town of Harrisburg, Lewis County, New York. Pratt and Pratt Archaeological Consultants, Inc., Cazenovia, NY.
Robinson, Elisha 1888 Atlas of Jefferson County, New York. E. Robinson, New York.
The Watertown Daily Times n.d. “Mansions and Old Houses of The North Country.” Originally published in The Watertown Daily Times, converted to pdf by David Lane, Newspaper Staff. Electronic document, http://www.nymews.com/oldhouses/oldwatertownsorted.html, Accessed November 26, 2018.
Tooker, Elisabeth 1978 The League of the Iroquois: Its History, Politics, and Ritual. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 418-441. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Town of Rodman n.d. Cemeteries. Electronic database, http://www.townofrodmanny.org/cemetery.html, accessed November 16, 2018. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-4 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
Trigger, Bruce G. 1978 Early Iroquois Contacts with Europeans. In Northeast, pp. 344-356. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Trigger, Bruce G., and James F. Pendergast 1978 Saint Lawrence Iroquoians. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 357-361. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1904 New York Carthage Quadrangle, 15 Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. On file, Historic USGS Maps of New England & New York, University of New Hampshire, Dimond Library, Documents Department & Data Center, Durham. Electronic database, http://docs.unh.edu/nhtopos/Carthage.htm, accessed November 23, 2018.
1905 New York Orwell Quadrangle, 15 Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. On file, Historic USGS Maps of New England & New York, University of New Hampshire, Dimond Library, Documents Department & Data Center, Durham. Electronic database, http://docs.unh.edu/nhtopos/OrwellNY.htm, accessed November 23, 2018.
1909 New York Watertown Quadrangle, 15 Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. On file, Historic USGS Maps of New England & New York, University of New Hampshire, Dimond Library, Documents Department & Data Center, Durham. Electronic database, http://docs.unh.edu/nhtopos/Watertown.htm, accessed November 23, 2018.
1942 Copenhagen Quadrangle New York. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1943a Carthage Quadrangle New York. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1943b New Boston Quadrangle New York-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1943c Page Quadrangle New York-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1943d Sears Pond Quadrangle New York-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1943e West Lowville Quadrangle New York-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1959a Barnes Corner Quadrangle New York. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1959b Rodman Quadrangle New York. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1959c Rutland Center Quadrangle New York. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
1959d Watertown New York-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1982. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-5 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE
1960 Worth Center-Lewis Co. 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic). Photoinspected 1980. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1985 Watertown New York. 1:100,000. Photoinspected 1992. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Widdis, Randy William 1991 “We Breathe The Same Air”: Eastern Ontarian Migration to Watertown, New York. In Coming and Becoming; Pluralism in New York State History, compiled by Wendell Tripp, pp. 227-246. New York State Historical Association, Cooperstown, NY.
Panamerican Consultants, Inc. 7-6 Deer River Wind Farm 5-Mile Visual APE