DOCSLIB.ORG

Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Chain Bridge Road Sidewalk Project Area, City of Fairfax, Virginia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Chain Bridge Road Sidewalk Project Area, City of Fairfax, Virginia PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY OF THE CHAIN BRIDGE ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT AREA, CITY OF FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA by Joseph R. Blondino, M. Chris Manning, and Earl E. Proper Prepared for City of Fairfax and Rinker Design Associates, P.C. Prepared by DOVETAIL CULTURAL RESOURCE GROUP March 2016 Phase I Cultural Resource Survey of the Chain Bridge Road Sidewalk Project Area, City of Fairfax, Virginia by Joseph R. Blondino, M. Chris Manning, and Earl E. Proper Prepared for City of Fairfax 10455 Armstrong Street Fairfax, Virginia 22030 and Rinker Design Associates, P.C. 9385 Discovery Boulevard, Suite 200 Manassas, Virginia 20109 Prepared by Dovetail Cultural Resource Group 300 Central Road, Suite 200 Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 Dovetail Job #15-054 March 2016 March 29, 2016 Kerri S. Barile, Principal Investigator Date Dovetail Cultural Resource Group This page intentionally left blank ABSTRACT On behalf of Rinker Design Associates, P.C. (Rinker), Dovetail Cultural Resource Group (Dovetail) conducted a Phase I cultural resource survey of the Chain Bridge Road Sidewalk project area in November 2015. The approximately 1,100-foot (335.3-m) project area, located in the City of Fairfax, Virginia, runs generally north-south along the west side of Chain Bridge Road (Route 123) from the intersection with Rust Hill Place, just south of the Accotink Creek bridge, to a driveway approximately 225 feet (68.6 m) north of the intersection with North Street. The study area encompasses an area of approximately 0.4 acres (0.16 ha). The architectural investigation of the Chain Bridge Road Sidewalk project area involved a field survey of all above-ground resources over 50 years in age located within the architectural project area, which is defined as the project footprint plus the area where alterations to a resource’s setting and feeling may occur. Eight previously recorded resources were identified within the architectural project area, two of which are no longer extant. The current survey did not identify any newly recorded above-ground resources within the architectural project area. Dovetail recommends the single-family dwelling at 3936 Chain Bridge Road (151-0003-0018) as requiring additional documentation and research to determine eligibility for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listing under Criteria A, B and C. Two additional resources (151-5453 and 151-5466) are no longer extant and are recommended not eligible. Dovetail recommends that the City of Fairfax Historic District (151-0003) remains listed on the NRHP and that the Moore- McCandlish House (151-151-0012; 151-0003-0017) at 3950 Chain Bridge Road remains eligible under Criterion C. Dovetail further recommends the following single-family dwellings are eligible for the NRHP: 3920 Chain Bridge Road (151-0003-0019; Criterion B), 3906 Chain Bridge Road (151-0003-0020; Criterion C), and 3820 Chain Bridge Road (151-151-0003-0021; Criterion C). The resources were not evaluated under Criterion D. The Phase I archaeological survey included a pedestrian reconnaissance to identify areas within the project area that had the potential for intact deposits, as well as to determine which areas did not warrant subsurface testing as a result of disturbance, excessive slope, or buried utilities. Subsurface investigations of the intact portions of the project area were conducted to identify historic resources over 50 years in age and make recommendations on their (NRHP) criteria eligibility. In addition, a metal detector survey was conducted due to the possibility that Civil War deposits might exist in the area. A total of 23 shovel test pits (STPs) was excavated along a single transect running the length of the project area. One new archaeological site was identified (44FX3777), and artifacts were recovered from within the boundaries of a previously recorded site (44FX3237). No intact features or buried surfaces were identified at either of these sites, and artifact density was relatively low. In addition to the two archaeological sites, one Isolated Find (ISF) location was identified. Based on the results of the Phase I archaeological survey, Dovetail recommends that none of these artifact recovery locations are eligible for inclusion on the NRHP and/or contribute to the eligibility of larger sites in the area. i This page intentionally left blank ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...............................................................................................5 Geology ..................................................................................................................................5 Hydrology ..............................................................................................................................5 Soils .......................................................................................................................................5 HISTORIC CONTEXT .............................................................................................................7 Prehistoric Period ...................................................................................................................7 Pre-Clovis (?–13,000 B.P.) ................................................................................................7 Paleoindian Period (13,000−10,000 B.P.) .........................................................................8 Archaic Period (10,000–3200 B.P.) ...................................................................................8 Woodland Period (3200–400 B.P.) ....................................................................................9 Contact Period ..................................................................................................................10 Historic Period .....................................................................................................................11 Settlement to Society (1607–1750) ..................................................................................11 Colony to Nation (1750–1789) ........................................................................................11 Early National Period (1789–1830) .................................................................................12 Antebellum Period (1830–1860) ......................................................................................12 Civil War (1861–1865) ....................................................................................................14 Reconstruction and Growth (1865–1917) ........................................................................14 The Twentieth Century (1917–present) ...........................................................................14 PROJECT METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................17 Architectural Survey ............................................................................................................17 Archaeological Survey .........................................................................................................17 Laboratory Analysis .............................................................................................................18 BACKGROUND RESEARCH ...............................................................................................19 Previous Surveys Near Project Area ....................................................................................19 Previous Architectural Surveys ........................................................................................19 Previous Archaeological Surveys ....................................................................................20 Previously Recorded Architectural Resources ....................................................................21 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites ..........................................................................22 RESULTS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY ..............................................................27 RESULTS OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY ..........................................................39 Subsurface Survey ...............................................................................................................43 Previously Recorded Site 44FX3237 ...............................................................................43 Site 44FX3777 .................................................................................................................46 Metal Detector Survey .........................................................................................................47 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................49 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................51 APPENDIX A: PREVIOUSLY RECORDED ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES ..............59 APPENDIX B: SHOVEL TEST RECORD ............................................................................75 APPENDIX C: ARTIFACT CATALOG ................................................................................79
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Upper Cenozoic Deposits of the Central Delmarva Peninsula, Maryland and Delaware
    Upper Ceoozoic Deposits GEOLOGICAL SXJEVilY FRQfEBSIONAL lAPEE Upper Cenozoic Deposits of the Central Delmarva Peninsula, Maryland and Delaware By JAMES P. OWENS and CHARLES S. DENNY SURFACE AND SHALLOW SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC STUDIES IN THE EMERGED COASTAL PLAIN OF THE MIDDLE ATLANTIC STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1067-A Upper Tertiary deltaic and shallow-water marine deposits form the backbone of the peninsula. The oldest marine deposits of Pleistocene age reach a maximum altitude of 15 meters (50 feet) and have been dated radiometrically at about 100,000 years UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1979 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY H. William Menard, Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Owens, James Patrick, 1924- Upper Cenozoic deposits of the central Delmarva Peninsula, Maryland and Delaware. (Surface and shallow subsurface geologic studies in the emerged coastal plain of the Middle Atlantic States) (Geological Survey professional paper ; 1067-A) Bibliography: p. Includes index. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.16:1067-A 1. Geology, Stratigraphic Cenozoic. 2. Geology Delmarva Peninsula. I. Denny, Charles Storrow, 1911- joint author. II. Title. III. Series. IV. Series: United States. Geological Survey. Professional paper ; 1067-A. QE690.093 551.7'8 77-608325 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock Number 024-001-03191-4 CONTENTS Abstract._____________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Shore, VA
    Community Info Sheet Eastern Shore, VA Total Population (2010): 45,553 Accomack County: 33,164 North Hampton County: 12,389 Parksley, VA: 842 (Northampton and Accomack Counties comprise the Eastern Shore of Virginia.) Things Eastern Shore is known for: Chincoteague Island & Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, The Chesapeake Bay, The Annual Wild Pony Round Up, NASA Wallops Flight Facility of the Eastern Shore, Tyson & Purdue Chicken Processing Plants, The Crabbing and Fishing Industry Eastern Shore Overview: The Eastern Shore of Virginia offers a historic setting, serene lifestyle, and abundant outdoor recreation. It is a 70-mile-long stretch of shoreline at the southern end of the Delmarva Peninsula. It is comprised of two counties – Accomack and North Hampton – and is bordered by the Chesapeake Bay to the West, the Atlantic Ocean to the East, and Maryland to the North. It is accessible to mainland Virginia by the 23-mile-long Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel. Prior to its completion in 1964, mainland Virginia was only accessible by ferry, or by lengthy commute through Maryland and Washington D.C. Despite being largely isolated from mainland Virginia, the Eastern Shore has a robust agricultural The Delmarva Peninsula The Eastern Shore of Virginia economy. Crabbing and fishing industries share the coastline, while large-scale produce and chicken farms utilize much of the peninsula itself. Tyson and Accomack County Census 2010 Stats* Perdue both maintain poultry processing plants on the shore and are two of the largest employers in Population: 33,164 the area. The agricultural community has drawn Race: many Hispanic or Latino immigrants and migrant 68% White workers to the area; these workers spend all or 29% African American parts of their year working in farms or factories.
    [Show full text]
  • Scenic Landforms of Virginia
    Vol. 34 August 1988 No. 3 SCENIC LANDFORMS OF VIRGINIA Harry Webb . Virginia has a wide variety of scenic landforms, such State Highway, SR - State Road, GWNF.R(T) - George as mountains, waterfalls, gorges, islands, water and Washington National Forest Road (Trail), JNFR(T) - wind gaps, caves, valleys, hills, and cliffs. These land- Jefferson National Forest Road (Trail), BRPMP - Blue forms, some with interesting names such as Hanging Ridge Parkway mile post, and SNPMP - Shenandoah Rock, Devils Backbone, Striped Rock, and Lovers Leap, National Park mile post. range in elevation from Mt. Rogers at 5729 feet to As- This listing is primarily of those landforms named on sateague and Tangier islands near sea level. Two nat- topographic maps. It is hoped that the reader will advise ural lakes occur in Virginia, Mountain Lake in Giles the Division of other noteworthy landforms in the st& County and Lake Drummond in the City of Chesapeake. that are not mentioned. For those features on private Gaps through the mountains were important routes for land always obtain the owner's permission before vis- early settlers and positions for military movements dur- iting. Some particularly interesting features are de- ing the Civil War. Today, many gaps are still important scribed in more detail below. locations of roads and highways. For this report, landforms are listed alphabetically Dismal Swamp (see Chesapeake, City of) by county or city. Features along county lines are de- The Dismal Swamp, located in southeastern Virginia, scribed in only one county with references in other ap- is about 10 to 11 miles wide and 15 miles long, and propriate counties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Recreation the Delmarva Peninsula by David
    THE RECREATION POTENTIAL OF THE DELMARVA PENINSULA BY DAVID LEE RUBIN S.B., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1965) SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOT THE DEGREE OF MASTER IN CITY PLANNING at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June, 1966 Signature of Author.,.-.-,.*....... .. .*.0 .. .. ...... .. ...... ... Department of City and Regional Planning May 23, 1966 Certified by.... ....... .- -*s.e- Super....... Thesis Supervisor Accepted by... ... ...tire r'*n.-..0 *10iy.- .. 0....................0 Chairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Students 038 The Recreation Potential of the Delmarva Peninsula By David Lee Rubin Submitted to the Department of City and Regional Planning on 23 May, 1966 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning. rhis thesis is a plan for the development of Lne recreation potential of the Delmarva Peninsyla, the lower counties of Delaware and the Eastern Shore of Maryland and Virginia, to meet the needs of the Megalopolitan population. Before 1952, the Delmarva Peninsula was isolated, and no development of any kind occurred. The population was stable, with no in migration, and the attitudes were rural. The economy was sagging. Then a bridge was built across the Chesapeake Bay, and the peninsula became a recreation resource for the Baltimore and Washington areas. Ocean City and Rehoboth, the major resorts, have grown rapidly since then. In 1964, the opening of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel further accellerated growth. There are presently plans for the development of a National Seashore on Assateague Island, home of the Chincoteague ponies, as well as state parks along the Chesapeake Bay, and such facilities as a causeway through the ocean and a residential complex in the Indian River Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Staff Report PA 2017-CW-4CP
    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK STAFF REPORT FOR PLAN AMENDMENT PA 2017-CW-4CP BACKGROUND On July 9, 2013, through the approval of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Work Program, the Board of Supervisors authorized annual consideration, if needed, of a Comprehensive Plan amendment to update information pertaining to Heritage Resources in the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment will primarily incorporate current information relating to historic properties in Fairfax County. Heritage Resources information in the Comprehensive Plan was last updated in September 2016 to reflect updates through 2015. Since that time, two properties have been added to the Fairfax County Inventory of Historic Sites (Inventory), the historic status of two properties has been revised, and seventeen have been removed. The Inventory is maintained by the History Commission. ANALYSIS The revisions include additions and removals to the Inventory of Historic Sites to reflect History Commission actions, editorial revisions to language which describes Historic Overlay Districts, and updates to references to county departments. The two new sites added to the Inventory are: 1) Hannah P. Clark/Enyedi House (c. 1876), a vernacular farm house in the Mount Vernon Supervisor District, Lower Potomac Planning District, added to the Inventory by the History Commission in October 2017; and 2) the Fort Belvoir Military Railroad Historic Corridor (1810-1993), also in the Mount Vernon Supervisor District, Lower Potomac and Springfield Planning Districts, added to the Virginia Landmarks Register, and therefore added also to the Inventory, in June 2016. Seventeen sites listed in the Inventory of Historic Sites are currently noted in the Plan tables with an asterisk to show the resource as demolished.
    [Show full text]
  • Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan
    Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan final report prepared for Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Maryland Department of Transportation October 20, 2006 Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Board Members Marvin R. Long, Wicomico County, MPO Chair Rick Pollitt, City of Fruitland, MPO Vice Chair Michael P. Dunn, City of Salisbury Charles Fisher, Tri-County Council for the Lower Eastern Shore of Maryland Luther Hitchens, Town of Delmar, Maryland Mike Nixon, Maryland Department Of Transportation John F. Outten, Town of Delmar, Delaware (Non-Voting) Stevie Prettyman, Wicomico County Ralph Reeb, Delaware Department of Transportation (Non-Voting) Theodore E. Shea II, Wicomico County Barrie P. Tilghman, City of Salisbury Technical Advisory Committee John Redden, Wicomico County Department of Public Works, Chair Ray Birch, City of Salisbury Public Works, Vice Chair Dr. Kwame Arhin, Federal Highway Administration Brad Bellaccico, City of Salisbury Chamber of Commerce, Transportation Subcommittee Bob Bryant, Ocean City/Wicomico County Airport Authority Salisbury/Wicomico Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Salisbury/Wicomico Area Long-Range Transportation Plan Bob Cook, Delmarva Water Transport Advisory Committee, (Ex-Officio) James Dooley, State Highway Administration Tracey Gordy, Maryland Department of Planning Rob Hart, Shore Transit Lenny Howard, Maryland Transit Administration Dan Johnson, Federal Highway Administration
    [Show full text]
  • Fairfax Areas of Burke Braving the Rain News, Page 6
    Serving Fairfax Areas of Burke Braving The Rain News, Page 6 Follow on Twitter: @ffxconnection on Twitter: Follow Classified, Page 20 Classified, ❖ Sports, Page 16 ❖ Entertainment, Page 10 Wellbeing George Mason Univer- Page 15 sity cheerleader Chelsea Buckner braves the rain to cheer on runners in the Marine Corps Marathon Healthy A Perfect Storm Kids Fun Run Oct. 29 Of Headaches at the Pentagon. Elections 2011, Page 3 Requested in home 11-4-11 home in Requested Partisan Messages material. sensitive Time In School Postmaster: Attention PERMIT #322 PERMIT Board Race MD Easton, PAID Elections 2011, Page 12 Postage U.S. PRSRT STD PRSRT Photo by Deb Cobb/The Connection www.ConnectionNewspapers.comNovember 3-9, 2011 online at www.connectionnewspapers.comFairfax Connection ❖ November 3-9, 2011 ❖ 1 There’s Never Been a Better Time For a Change… Teachers Say…Get Educated! Did you know? Teachers and Parents Agree on School Board candidates! Did you know that the Fairfax Education Association, Fairfax Zero Tolerance Reform, and the Fairfax County Federation of Teachers, are endorsing the SAME CANDIDATES for School Board? • It’s time for a change that will bring the necessary resources to our neediest students, and provide differentiated support for all FCPS kids, • It’s time for a change that will bring greater sensitivity and a restorative, educational, and therapeutic discipline process to our children, • It’s time for a change that will bring greater professional autonomy for our teachers to start teaching with creativity, and not ‘to the test’. These candidates will bring about change for the better: • Braddock: Megan McLaughlin • Lee: Tamara Derenak Kaufax • Providence: Patty Reed • Dranesville: Louise Epstein • Mason: Sandy Evans • Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Plead Guilty to Heroin Distribution Richter, Shade Appear in Federal Court; Another Person Arrested
    Attention Postmaster: PRSRT STD Time-sensitive material. U.S. Postage Requested in home 1-15-09 PAID Elkton, MD Centreville ❖ Clifton ❖ Little Rocky Run PERMIT #31 SOUTHERN EDITION JAN. 15-21, 2009 "Heroin's Price" 25 CENTS Newsstand Price Volume XXIII, NO. 2 Two Plead Guilty to Heroin Distribution Richter, Shade appear in federal court; another person arrested. By Bonnie Hobbs Manor died in March 2008 of a Centre View heroin overdose, both local and by Photo federal authorities launched a full- heir cases were heard scale investigation. In November, separately, but both authorities charged 10 people — TAnna Lucille Richter almost all from Centreville — with Bonnie Hobbs and Ashleigh Lynn conspiracy to distribute heroin. Shade pleaded guilty Monday in They arrested three more in De- federal court to conspiracy to dis- cember and, on Monday, Jan. 12, tribute 100 grams or more of they also charged Matthew heroin. Afterward, however, Rich- Greenlee, 23, of the City of Fairfax, View /Centre ter, 20, of Virginia Run, was al- with distributing heroin leading to lowed to remain free on bond; the Sept. 7 death of Carmen Shade, 19, of Fairfax, was taken Somers, 20, of Falls Church. Ac- into custody. cording to the affidavit unsealed Federal authorities contend that, Monday in federal court, Greenlee Some of the cast of Chantilly High’s children’s play, “The Princess and the Porcupine,” from June 2007 to mid-November allegedly gave her the drug and written by Director Ed Monk. 2008, they were involved in a she took it at his home, the night large, heroin-distribution ring in of Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil War Fought for the Union Which Represent 52% of the Sons of Harvard Killed in Action During This Conflict
    Advocates for Harvard ROTC . H CRIMSON UNION ARMY VETERANS Total served Died in service Killed in action Died by disease Harvard College grads 475 73 69 26 Harvard College- non grads 114 22 Harvard Graduate schools 349 22 NA NA Total 938 117 69 26 The above total of Harvard alumni who died in the service of the Union included 5 major generals, 3 Brigadier Generals, 6 colonels, 19 LT Colonels and majors, 17 junior officers in the Army, 3 sergeants plus 3 Naval officers, including 2 Medical doctors. 72% of all Harvard alumni who served in the Civil War fought for the Union which represent 52% of the sons of Harvard killed in action during this conflict. As result among Harvard alumni, Union military losses were 10% compared with a 21% casualty rate for the Confederate Army. The battle of Gettysburg (PA) had the highest amount of Harvard alumni serving in the Union Army who were killed in action (i.e. 11), in addition 3 Harvard alumni Confederates also died in this battle. Secondly, seven Crimson warriors made the supreme sacrifice for the Union at Antietam (MD) with 5 more were killed in the battles of Cedar Mountain (VA) and Fredericksburg (VA). As expected, most of the Harvard alumni who died in the service of the Union were born and raised in the Northeastern states (e.g. 74% from Massachusetts). However, 9 Harvard alumni Union casualties were from the Mid West including one from the border state of Missouri. None of these Harvard men were from southern states. The below men who made the supreme sacrifice for their country to preserve the union which also resulted in the abolition of slavery.
    [Show full text]
  • Fairfax County History Commission Annual Report 2002
    Fairfax County History Commission Annual Report 3/ie.Armaria/ 'Hearings and Supporters of THOMAS 6™TORD TAIRJFADC as recorded at the (~o//ege of ?/ msSon don 2002 Fairfax County History Commission Fairfax City Regional Library FAIRFAX Virginia Room 3915 Chain Bridge Road COUNTY Fairfax, VA 22030 Tel: 703-246-2123 VIRGINIA December 9, 2002 Fairfax County Board of Supervisors 12055 Government Center Parkway Fairfax, Virginia 22055 Dear Madam Chairman and Members of the Board of Supervisors? Once again it is a pleasure for the Fairfax County History Commission to be able to present its Annua! Report What am exciting year this has been and I will touch on a few of our accomplishments. Publications Committee chaired by Dr. Donald Semes©? Two books have been published and a third will be available soon. The Preservation of History an Fairfax County, authored by well known historians Ross and Nairn Netherton details the development and preservation of history in our county during the past three or more decades and serves as a model for other communities. The Battle of Chantilly (Ox-Hill); Monumental Storm, by Charles Maisr© tells the story off this important Civil War battle fought during a ram sterns near the present site of the Fair Oaks Mall. This publication includes over 70 illustrations including maps and photographs making it possible to relate the events to present day locations. Stone Ground; A History of Umobb Mills, by Paula ESsey, available soon, details the fascinating story of a settlement in the western part of Fairfax County, which though it never became a town, played am important role In the comity's history.
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Quality Assessment of the Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware
    Water-Quality Assessment of the Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia-Effects of Agricultural Activities on, and Distribution of, Nitrate and Other Inorganic Constituents in the Surficial Aquifer By Pixie A. Hamilton, Judith M. Denver, Patrick J. Phillips, and Robert J. Shedlock U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 93-40 Towson, Maryland 1993 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: Area Assistant Regional Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey, WRD Books and Open-File Reports Section 8600 LaSalle Rd, 208 Carroll Bldg. U.S. Geological Survey Denver Federal Center, Box 25425 Towson, MD21286 Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Abstract................................................................................................ 1 Introduction............................................................................................. 2 Purpose and scope................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgments ................................................................................ 4 Description of study area................................................................................... 4 Hydrogeology.................................................................................... 4 Description of the surficial aquifer ............................................................ 6 Occurrence and flow of ground
    [Show full text]
  • The Civil War in Fairfax County, Virginia the Civil War in Fairfax County, Virginia Was the Most Divisive and Destructive Period in the County’S History
    (ANNE putting in section headings only 9/3) Confidential Draft August 31, 2020 rvsd 9/7/20 The Civil War in Fairfax County, Virginia The Civil War in Fairfax County, Virginia was the most divisive and destructive period in the county’s history. Soon after President Abraham Lincoln was elected President on November 6, 1860. local citizens began holding a series of public meetings at the courthouse to discuss whether Virginia should remain in the Union or secede and join the nascent Confederate States of America. Remain or Secede? Resolutions were adopted to expel pro-Union, anti-slavery men from the county. Several resolutions passed defending slavery. Other resolutions supported arming and funding local militia. The Fairfax Cavalry, under Captain M. D. Ball, and the Fairfax Rifles, under Captain William H. Dulany, drilled and paraded together on the courthouse yard throughout early 1861. Within ten days of Virginia’s vote to secede on May 23, 1861, the first armed conflict occurred in Fairfax County on June 1, in and around the same courthouse grounds where those public debates on secession began. Captain John Quincy Marr of the Warrenton Rifles was killed in the skirmish with Company B, Second U.S. Cavalry. He has been memorialized as the first Confederate officer to die in the Civil War. South Controls Western Half of County Through March 1862 In July, roughly 18,000 soldiers of the Army of Northeastern Virginia under the command of Union General Irvin McDowell advanced through the county. The Federals marched to the Battle of Blackburn’s Ford (July 18) and subsequently the Battle of First Manassas or Bull Run (July 21).
    [Show full text]