DRAFT REPORT PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE LOXAHATCHEE GROVES PROJECT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
J 2019
PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE LOXAHATCHEE GROVES PROJECT, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CONDUCTED FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING & TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3701 NW 98TH STREET GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32606
SEARCH PROJECT NO. E18274
BY
SEARCH
DRAFT ______LILLIAN AZEVEDO, PHD, RPA PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
WWW.SEARCHINC.COM
JANUARY 2019
SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ...... iii List of Figures ...... iv List of Tables ...... iv
Introduction ...... 1 Environmental Setting ...... 5 Paleoenvironment ...... 6 Cultural Context ...... 8 Native American Culture History ...... 8 History of Palm Beach and Martin Counties ...... 12 Background Research ...... 20 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources ...... 22 Historic Map and Aerial Photograph Review ...... 23 Cultural Resource Probability ...... 25 Methods ...... 28 Archaeological Survey ...... 28 Laboratory Methods and Curation ...... 28 Certified Local Government Consultation and Informant Interviews ...... 28 Unanticipated Discoveries ...... 28 Results ...... 30 Archaeological Survey Results ...... 30 Architectural Survey Results ...... 30 Conclusion and Recommendation ...... 34 References Cited ...... 35
Appendix A: Correspondence Appendix B: Unanticipated Discoveries Plan Appendix C: FDHR Survey Log Sheet
iii Introduction January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Loxahatchee Groves Project area location map, Palm Beach County, Florida ...... 2 Figure 2. Topographic overview of the Loxahatchee Groves Project area, Palm Beach County, Florida ...... 3 Figure 3. Aerial photograph showing the Loxahatchee Groves Project area ...... 4 Figure 4. Overview of the Project area showing the typical physical conditions, including open pasture and palmetto and intermittent pine ...... 5 Figure 5. Soil drainage within the Project area ...... 7 Figure 6. Cultural resource surveys and cultural resources within one mile of the Project area ...... 21 Figure 7. 1845 GLO map showing the Project area ...... 24 Figure 8. 1953 USDA aerial photograph showing the Project area ...... 26 Figure 9. 1971 USGS topographic map showing the Project area ...... 27 Figure 10. Archaeological survey results ...... 31 Figure 11. Typical soil profile encountered within the Project area at N1800, E700, showing three strata ...... 32 Figure 12. Modern refuse within the Project area ...... 32 Figure 13. Photograph facing south from N1800, E700, showing dry ditch ...... 33
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Typical Pedon for Riviera Series Soils ...... 6 Table 2. Previous Surveys within One Mile of the APE ...... 20 Table 3. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites within One Mile of the APE ...... 22 Table 4. Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Linear Resources within One Mile of the APE ...... 22
Introduction iv SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
INTRODUCTION
In December 2018, SEARCH completed a Phase I cultural resource assessment survey (CRAS) in support of the Loxahatchee Groves Project (Project) in the Town of Loxahatchee Groves, Palm Beach County, Florida, on behalf of Environmental Consulting & Technology, Inc. (ECT). The work was conducted in anticipation of permit requirements for the construction of three commercial properties within the Project area, which consists of a 15.9‐acre parcel in Section 31, Township 43 South, Range 41 East. Within the Project area, 6.76 acres will be developed: a 1.79‐acre parcel for a proposed Wawa gas station and convenience store, a 1.03‐acre parcel for a proposed Chase Bank, a 2.12‐acre parcel for a proposed Aldi grocery store, and a 1.73‐acre parcel for access roads and dry retention. The runoff will be retained within the Project area. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the proposed Project is defined as the entirety of the 15.9‐acre Project area.
This CRAS meets the provisions of Chapter 267, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 1A‐46, Florida Administrative Code. The Principal Investigator meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716‐42) and is listed on the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA). The Project area is located within the Town of Loxahatchee Groves, approximately 15 miles west of West Palm Beach. Figure 1 shows the general location of the Project area, while Figure 2 shows the location on a recent topographic map. The Project area is bound to the south by Southern Boulevard and to the west by B Road, as shown in Figure 3, which depicts the Project area on an aerial photograph.
The purpose of the survey was to identify cultural resources within the Project area and to assess their eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A total of 25 shovel tests were excavated at 50‐meter intervals across the Project area. No cultural resources were encountered during the survey. It is SEARCH’s opinion that the proposed Project will have no effect on cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP. No further cultural resource work is recommended.
1 Introduction January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Figure 1. Loxahatchee Groves Project area location map, Palm Beach County, Florida.
Introduction 2 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 2. Topographic overview of the Loxahatchee Groves Project area, Palm Beach County, Florida.
3 Introduction January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Figure 3. Aerial photograph showing the Loxahatchee Groves Project area.
Introduction 4 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project area is situated within the Eastern Flatwoods physiographic district and the Green Ridge‐Loxahatchee Karst subdistrict. This area is characterized by poorly‐drained open flatwoods with cypress strands (Brooks 1974). The Project area lies near the southern edge of this subdistrict, near the border of the Everglades physiographic subdistrict, and exhibits characteristics of the latter region, including elevations of less than 15 feet above mean sea level (amsl), pine flatwoods, and wet prairie.
The Project area consists of a single tract, approximately half of which contains open pasture. The remainder contains an understory of palmetto, grass, and Brazilian pepper, with intermittent pine (Figure 4). The natural hydrology of the area was historically dictated by rainfall with low nutrient levels. Approximately 4 miles southwest of the Project area, the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge contains the only remnant of the northern Everglades in Palm Beach County, Florida. This area, which historically extended across the Project area, consists of a mosaic of wet prairies, sawgrass ridges, sloughs, tree islands, cattail communities, and cypress swamp. Beginning with the Swampland Act of 1845 and later the 1907 Everglades
Figure 4. Overview of the Project area showing the typical physical conditions, including open pasture and palmetto and intermittent pine.
5 Environmental Setting January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Drainage Act, humans worked to build a network of canals to drain the Everglades. These efforts purposefully altered the natural hydrology of the area to make the land more suitable for agriculture. One of these canals for this effort, the West Palm Beach Canal (Florida Master Site File [FMSF] Resource 8PB10331), was constructed in 1917 and is located 100 meters south of the Project area.
The entire Project area consists of poorly‐drained Riviera fine sand, 0‐2 percent slopes (Figure 5). The US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS) describes this soil and notes that it forms in stratified sandy and loamy marine sediments. A typical pedon includes five horizons (Table 1) (USDA NRCS 2019).
Table 1. Typical Pedon for Riviera Series Soils. Horizon Depth Description 0‐6 inches A Dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) sand, very friable, gradual smooth boundary (0‐15 cm) 6‐28 inches Very pale brown (10YR 8/2) sand, single grained; loose, moderately acid, abrupt E (15‐72 cm) irregular boundary Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) sandy clay loam (Bt); common coarse distinct very pale 28‐36 inches Bt/E brown (10YR 8/2) tongues of sand (E); weak coarse subangular blocky structure; (72‐91 cm) slightly sticky; sand grains coated and bridged with clay Grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) sandy clay loam; sand grains coated and bridged with 36‐42 inches Btg clay; common coarse faint olive brown (2.5Y 4/4) masses if iron accumulation; (91‐107 cm) slightly alkaline; abrupt smooth boundary 42‐62 inches 2C Gray sand and shell fragments, loose; moderately alkaline (107‐157 cm)
PALEOENVIRONMENT
From 18,000 to 12,000 years before present (BP), Florida was much cooler and drier than today and then became warmer and wetter rather rapidly during the next three millennia. By no later than 9000 BP, the warmer climates of the Holocene began to prevail. These changes were more drastic in northern Florida and southern Georgia than in southern Florida, where the “peninsular effect” and a more tropically influenced climate tempered the effects of the continental glaciers that were melting far to the north (Watts 1969, 1971, 1975, 1980).
Melting of the continental ice sheets led to a significant rise in global sea level (summarized for long time scales by Rohling et al. 1998) that started from a low stand of ‐120 meters at 18,000 BP. The rise was slow while glacial conditions prevailed at high latitudes but became very rapid in the latest Pleistocene and earliest Holocene. By 6000 to 5000 BP, sea level had risen to only 3 to 5 meters lower than at present. As a generalization, the climate, water levels, and plant communities of Florida attained essentially modern conditions by 4000 BP during the Late Archaic period and have been fairly stable since.
Environmental Setting 6 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 5. Soil drainage within the Project area. The well‐drained soil and water south of the Project area is the West Palm Beach Canal.
7 Environmental Setting January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
CULTURAL CONTEXT
This cultural context includes an overview of the peopling of Florida from 12,000 BP until the present, with special emphasis on Native American cultures and historic activities in the East Okeechobee culture area.
NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURE HISTORY
The Project area is located within a region most recently classified as the East Okeechobee culture area (Carr and Beriault 1984). This area is not yet precisely defined geographically, but is located between the Atlantic coast and Lake Okeechobee, from the Palm Beach County‐ Broward County line northward to the north boundary of St. Lucie County. This area was once part of a larger Glades area as defined by Goggin (1947). Subsequent revisions based on increasing archaeological investigations in southern Florida resulted in a division of Goggin’s Glades culture area into various new areas, subareas, and districts (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 1988). An area surrounding much of the Lake Okeechobee basin was reclassified as Belle Glade (Sears 1982).
Several Belle Glade type earthworks occur on or near the east shore of Lake Okeechobee, including Big Mound City (8PB00048), the Boynton Mounds (8PB00100), Barley Barber 1 (8MT00019), and Belle Glade (8PB00041). In 1995, FMSF Survey No. 4038 (Carr et al. 1995) found only limited evidence for Belle Glade influence to the east of Lake Okeechobee. On the other hand, Furey (1972) and Wheeler (1992) argued for fairly substantial influence based on the presence of the aforementioned earthworks and Belle Glade pottery at coastal sites such as the Riviera Complex (Wheeler 1992). Contributing to this difference of opinion is the possibility that diffusion of Belle Glade pottery to the East Okeechobee region may not have occurred until relatively late in prehistory, possibly after AD 1000.
Although prehistoric native peoples entered Florida nearly 12,000 years ago, the earliest evidence for human occupation in southeast Florida dates to about 9000–9500 years BP. At the Cutler site in Miami, side‐notched stone projectile points, called Bolen points, were recovered in association with animal bones and a hearth feature (Carr 1986). Based on radiocarbon dates from a cultural stratum believed to be associated with the Bolen points, the Cutler site dates to around 9600 BP. At this time, South Florida was just emerging from a period that was much drier than present (Brooks 1974; Gleason et al. 1974). Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades did not exist, sea levels were much lower than at present, surface water was limited, and extensive grasslands probably existed, which may have attracted mammoth, bison, and other large grazing mammals. This landscape inhibited intensive human habitation except perhaps along the coast, although any coastal sites are probably now inundated by higher sea levels.
By the Early Archaic period, or the time that the Cutler site was occupied, precipitation had begun to increase in frequency and duration, resulting in surface water increase. In addition,
Cultural Context 8 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report sea levels were rising, which inundated formerly dry land offshore. The large Pleistocene mammals became extinct, and native peoples in southeast Florida adapted their lifestyles to the hunting and gathering of more modern species.
A dramatic increase in precipitation and runoff in south Florida is indicated by peat deposits in the Everglades that began to form about 6000–5000 BP (McDowell et al. 1969). Some of the earliest archaeological sites in the Glades region date to about this time (Gleason and Stone 1975:110; Hale 1989:48, 55‐56). The Westridge site (8BD01119) on Pine Island Ridge in Broward County is the only mid‐Archaic site identified in southeastern Florida (Carr et al. 1995).
By 5000 BP, the climate and environment of Florida had reached essentially modern conditions. This allowed a regionalization of cultures throughout Florida, as individual societies developed adaptations to their local environments (Milanich 1994). During the late Archaic period, the first pottery was made by the native peoples of Florida. In southern Florida, two late Archaic cultures can be identified archaeologically: the Orange culture and the Glades Archaic culture.
The Orange culture is known primarily from northeast Florida, including the Atlantic coast and the St. Johns River drainage basin. The Orange peoples made a distinctive pottery tempered with fiber. Other artifacts include Busycon adzes and Strombus celts. It is possible that the Busycon adzes found in northeast Florida at this time were of local origin, while the Strombus celts were traded into the area from southeastern Florida (Wheeler 1992). Site types are generally oyster and coquina shell middens along the coast and freshwater pond snail middens along the inland rivers and streams. Some coastal shell rings have also been observed (Newman and Weisman 1992).
Recent work in nearby Martin County indicates that Orange populations were present in the East Okeechobee area and were almost exclusively coastal (Carr et al. 1995). Only semi‐fiber‐ tempered sherds were recovered from the Mt. Elizabeth site (8MT00030), and Orange populations may have migrated southward from the Indian River estuary located to the north. The Joseph Reed Mound (8MT00013) on Jupiter Island may represent one of the more southerly Orange settlements. Although the Reed Mound has been damaged by storm surges, it was once a constructed ring made up mostly of oyster shell. In this respect, it seems quite similar to other Orange period shell rings located farther north (Newman and Weisman 1992).
James Pepe suggests that a separate late Archaic culture, which he refers to as the “Glades Archaic,” also was present in southern Florida and probably had only limited ties to the Orange culture (Carr et al. 1995). The presence of this culture is suggested by non‐ceramic bone middens now recognized as typical on nearly every interior tree island or former tree island in nearly every marsh or former marsh in southern Florida. This site type is now well documented for the Big Cypress Swamp (Ehrenhard et al. 1978, 1979; Ehrenhard and Taylor 1980), the Brighton Seminole Reservation (Carr and Steele 1993), and similar sites, such as the Tree Island site (8DA01087) and the Bass Creek site (8BD02878). Several of these types of sites also have been identified in the Loxahatchee Slough and Allapatah Flats of Martin and Palm Beach Counties (Carr et al. 1995). Late Archaic ceramic sites also have been found on the Pahokee
9 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Ridge by Hale (1989). Some of these sites, such as Reese #3 (8PB07988) and the Bass Creek site (8BD02878), are very dense and represent long‐term, perhaps permanent, occupations. Smaller and less dense sites probably represent short‐term camp sites. Faunal remains from these sites are all mainly freshwater species, such as turtle, fish, and pond apple snail, which were plentiful in the surrounding marshes.
The Glades Archaic now is viewed as an adaptation to life within the newly formed interior wetlands of the late Archaic peninsular Florida. This adaptation was so complete that Glades Archaic peoples were able to remain relatively unchanged for more than 2,000 years.
Research conducted by Florida Atlantic University (Kennedy et al. 1991) makes it clear that Goggin’s (1947) Glades chronology is no longer useful for the East Okeechobee area. Therefore, a new matrix that combines a chronology and a definition of periods specific to this area has been proposed by James Pepe (Carr et al. 1995). It is important to note that the only radiocarbon dates recorded in the area have come from Jupiter Inlet I (8PB00034) and that the following chronology is based mainly on sites in the Jupiter area.
The East Okeechobee I period (750 BC–ca. AD 800) is defined by the use of sand‐tempered plain pottery in most of the area. This pottery is found in the Hungryland Midden (8PB06294) (Kennedy et al. 1991); the numerous sites recently identified along the upper Loxahatchee River (Carr et al. 1995; Jester et al. 1994); the basal levels of Jupiter Inlet I (8PB00034) (Jester et al. 1993); and sites in the Barley Barber Florida Power & Light power plant parcel (Carr 1974; Williams 1975). Belle Glade Plain pottery is a minor type in the East Okeechobee area, except in the Spanish River Complex of Boca Raton, where it is predominant. In the Boca Raton area, the otherwise plentiful sand‐tempered plain pottery is a minor type (Furey 1972). This aberration may be the result of influence from an East Okeechobeean settlement in the Boca Raton area. Other types of pottery, such as St. Johns Plain, either are absent or make up only trace amounts in the ceramic assemblages of this period.
As with the Glades Archaic, sites are better documented in the interior wetlands than on the coast. However, unlike this earlier period, evidence of occupation of the coastal estuaries, probably seasonally, is found at Jupiter Inlet 1 and the Spanish River Complex sites. Further, sites along the upper Loxahatchee River demonstrate the importance of these transverse drainages as emerging transportation routes between the coast and the interior wetlands. These sites probably represent transient campsites that were occupied seasonally and were not located in exactly the same place every year. This would explain the extended length and unevenly distributed middens found at most of the upper Loxahatchee sites. The long time span of the East Okeechobee I period likely will be subdivided as more research is completed in the area, and changes in ceramic rim styles may prove to be the most useful tool for this purpose.
The East Okeechobee II period starts about AD 800 and ends about AD 1000. This relatively short period is marked by the appearance of St. Johns plain ceramics, as it is documented at Jupiter Inlet I (8PB00034) and Suni Sands (8PB07718). The noticeable lack of St. Johns ceramics
Cultural Context 10 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report in the interior sites testify to a change in settlement patterns for East Okeechobee II. It appears that settlements in this period were concentrated along the coast for the first time and, excepting the earlier Orange settlements, probably were occupied on a permanent basis. In the southern part of the area, influenced by the East Okeechobeean settlement, this period is marked by an increase in the use of sand‐tempered plain pottery and a corresponding slight decrease in Belle Glade plain pottery. The dates for this period in and around Boca Raton may also be slightly later, perhaps from about AD 950 to AD 1200.
The East Okeechobee III period starts about AD 1000 and ends about AD 1500. Jupiter Inlet I (8PB00034) provides a radiocarbon date for the beginning of the period, where St. Johns check‐ stamped pottery, the marker type for this period, makes its first appearance. No date on the first appearance of this type has been obtained from the Spanish River Complex, but it may appear later, perhaps at around AD 1200, as it does in the rest of southern Florida. In all parts of the East Okeechobee area, this period is marked by a substantial increase in the presence of the St. Johns ceramic series, until St. Johns plain and St. Johns check‐stamped eventually become the dominant types, a trend visible at the Riviera Site (8PB00030) (Wheeler 1992). Before the St. Johns series becomes predominant in the Boca Raton area, however, the increase in sand‐tempered plain and the decrease in Belle Glade plain continues, so that both the amounts of the sand‐tempered plain and the St. Johns wares are increasing simultaneously. This period ends with the appearance of European goods. A tentative date contemporaneous with sustained European contact in other areas of south Florida is AD 1500.
East Okeechobee IV is marked essentially by the same ceramics as the previous period, except with the addition of European goods. The St. Johns ceramic series is predominant, and the Riviera Site (8PB00030) suggests that St. Johns check‐stamped pottery may be the most common variety. The native group encountered by Europeans at this time on the Atlantic coast of the East Okeechobee Area was called the Jeaga. It is possible that the Jeaga were under the political dominance of the Calusa, a group centered on the southwestern coast of Florida. However, the large amounts of St. Johns pottery and other artifacts from the Indian River and St. Johns areas in the East Okeechobee area during this time suggests their cultural influences instead came from the north. Jonathan Dickinson (Andrews and Andrews 1985 [1699]) also observed that the Jeaga were forced to hand over shipwrecked cargo to the Ais, their neighbors to the north. Thus, the specific political and economic relationship that existed between the Calusa and the Jeaga remains problematic. It may be the case that the Calusa’s influence was less strong than traditionally thought or sporadic in nature. It also may have been hierarchically shared with the Ais and, perhaps, the Timucua farther to the north.
It is not known whether the Jeaga occupied the lakeshore and the interior wetlands. It is possible that the Mayami, the group normally associated with Lake Okeechobee and particularly Fisheating Creek on the lake’s west side, also were on the east side of the lake basin and were responsible for the Barley Barber earthworks. Of course, European contact marked the beginning of the end for the native populations throughout Florida. It has been estimated that there were about 20,000 natives in southern Florida when the Spanish arrived (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). By 1763, when the English gained control of Florida, the population had
11 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
been reduced to several hundred. These tribal remnants were reported to have migrated to Cuba with the Spanish (Romans 1962 [1775]). However, it is likely that the “Spanish Indians” who raided Indian Key in 1840 were the mixed‐blood descendants of the Calusa and/or refugees from the northern Florida missions that were raided by the English in the early eighteenth century (Sturtevant 1953). These Spanish‐Indians became part of the Seminoles who had fled into southern Florida after the 1838 Battle of Okeechobee.
HISTORY OF PALM BEACH AND MARTIN COUNTIES
The First Spanish Period, 1513–1763
The historical roots of Palm Beach and Martin Counties extend back to the earliest days of Spain’s sixteenth‐century explorations of North America when Juan Ponce de Leon sailed along the coast of the county. Ponce de Leon left Puerto Rico on March 3, 1513, with a fleet of three ships and reached Florida a month later. After sailing on a northwesterly course for 30 days, the ships landed either north of Cape Canaveral (Milanich 1995) or south of the Cape in the vicinity of modern‐day Melbourne Beach (Eriksen 1994; Gannon 1996). Ponce de Leon called this land La Florida since it was sighted during the Feast of Flowers (Pascua Florida) (Milanich 1995). Ponce de Leon remained at his initial landing place for six days before pulling anchor and sailing south toward Jupiter Inlet, where he and his crew landed to obtain water and firewood. Jupiter Inlet is located in western Palm Beach County. Leaving this site, the fleet rode the counter currents of the Gulf Stream to Biscayne Bay and eventually rounded the southern tip of the peninsula (Gannon 1996; Milanich 1995).
After the arrival of the Spanish, the French became involved in Florida, but this influence was temporary and did not extend to the counties in question. In 1564, Fort Caroline was established near present‐day Jacksonville. The colony suffered from lack of supplies and poor relations with the Utina Native Americans. The Spanish king, Phillip II, sent Admiral Pedro Menéndez de Avilés to destroy Fort Caroline and reclaim the land for Spain. Achieving this goal, Menéndez established the first permanent settlement of St. Augustine in 1565. Spain maintained the St. Augustine settlement and, in the decades that followed, a string of Spanish missions were established in Florida in an attempt to consolidate Spain’s control over Florida (Tebeau 1971).
Chosen for its strategic location, St. Augustine existed as a military outpost and as a base for missionaries who worked at converting the native population to Catholicism and also as a base for protecting Spain’s maritime activity along the coast. Menéndez planned to establish garrisons and missions at the mouths of major rivers, many of which he wrongly assumed were interconnected (Tebeau 1971). Spanish soldiers established Fort Santa Lucia at Jupiter Inlet on December 13, 1565, but shortly thereafter, they abandoned the fort due to supply shortages. Conditions had become so unbearable that the men ate their shoes, belts, snakes, rats, and dwarf palmettos for sustenance. Not surprisingly, the soldiers mutinied, bringing to an end the
Cultural Context 12 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
small Spanish outpost in Palm Beach County (Gannon 1983; Lyon 1976). The Spanish did not pay further attention to the region, focusing their efforts on St. Augustine.
In 1696, Jonathan Dickinson, a Quaker sailing for Philadelphia from Port Royal, Jamaica, and his fellow shipmates were shipwrecked near Jupiter Inlet. In his published firsthand account of the events that followed, he painted a dreary picture of the surrounding countryside. He wrote that this “wilderness country looked very dismal, having no trees, but only sand hills covered with shrubby palmetto, the stalks of which were prickly, that there was no walking amongst them” (Andrews and Andrews 1985 [1699]). Most of the crew and passengers reached St. Augustine and, eventually, present‐day Charleston, South Carolina (McGoun 1998). By the late seventeenth century, the English, who had settled in Charleston, had begun to influence the overthrow of the Spanish in Florida through alliances with Native Americans (Tebeau 1971). In their effort to secure Florida from the Spanish, the English forces destroyed the mission system in the early 1700s. However, the Spanish managed to cling to their colony for many more years.
The British Period, 1763–1784
At the end of the Seven Years’ War in 1763, Spain surrendered Florida to Great Britain. The British divided Florida into two governmental districts—East and West Florida—separated by the Apalachicola River. Present‐day Palm Beach County was included in East Florida (Wright 1975). Eager to colonize the province, the British made a considerable effort to induce settlement and develop an economy in East Florida (Boyd et al. 1951).
In an effort to maintain their foothold in Florida, Britain granted large tracts of land to prospective settlers, many of whom brought slaves to the province as the Spanish had. Several of these land grants were developed as plantations, but none are apparent in these two counties. Dr. Andrew Turnbull’s colony at New Smyrna (Volusia County) was among the most significant. This development and others fueled the colony’s need for improved roads. By 1775, the government had completed the first major road in the territory—the King’s Road, which stretched north from Turnbull’s colony to the St. Mary’s River via St. Augustine and Cowford (today’s Jacksonville) (Ward 1985). The King’s Road was the first road in Florida wide enough to accommodate wheeled vehicles (Adams et al. 1997).
The makeup of Florida’s Native American population was changing by the mid‐eighteenth century as Creeks from Georgia and neighboring regions migrated into the province. The Spanish had called these migrants cimarrón, meaning “wild” and “runaway.” The term “Seminole” is thought to have derived from this reference (Fernald and Purdum 1992). Concentrated in northern Florida until the early nineteenth century, the Seminoles eventually spread southward into the peninsula. The Seminoles prospered in Florida, raising cattle, trading with whites, and engaging in small scale farming (Fairbanks 1973).
The American colonies declared their independence from British rule in 1776. Georgia and South Carolina required their citizens to take a strict oath of loyalty to the causes of the
13 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
American colonies, thus forcing many British loyalists to seek shelter in British East Florida (Wright 1976). In 1778 alone, approximately 7,000 loyalist arrived in Florida. In addition to the influx of loyalists from the north, Minorcans from the Turnbull colony in New Smyrna were relocated to St. Augustine during the 1780s; some established farms to the north along the North River (Griffin 1990; Quinn 1975).
The Second Spanish Period, 1784–1821
Following the American Revolution, the Treaty of Paris (1783) returned Florida to the Spanish. In 1784, the Spanish began to reoccupy Florida. During the Second Spanish period, Spain continued the British system of granting land to encourage settlement. Many of the new grantees occupied plantations and farms that the British had abandoned. The Spanish attempted to control the Seminoles through trade and supply, just as the British had done (Tebeau 1971). In 1815, the Spanish government granted land in present‐day Palm Beach County to Eusebio Gomez. The land was located in northeastern Palm Beach County on Jupiter Inlet. Gomez sold this large tract of land to Joseph Delespine in 1821. This coastal land grant was divided and sold well into the American period (State Archives of Florida 2013).
In the early nineteenth century, the United States pressured Spain to surrender Florida. American frontiersmen increasingly came into conflict with the Seminoles and the Spanish in the territory. Self‐emancipated slaves from American plantations joined the Seminoles and otherwise found refuge in Florida, adding fire to the already burning tension. American settlers invaded East Florida during the so‐called Patriot War of 1813 (Mahon 1992). The First Seminole War followed in 1817–1818, a conflict in which General Andrew Jackson, known to the Seminoles as “Sharp Knife,” invaded Spanish Florida and destroyed Seminole towns. In August 1818, in an attempt to stabilize diplomatic relations with Spain, the United States returned lands captured by Jackson. In 1819, a treaty of cessation was arranged between the United States and Spain. This was followed by another treaty, ratified February 22, 1821, making Florida a territory of the United States (Tebeau 1971).
The Early American Period, 1821–1845
Some of the first American settlers came to present‐day Palm Beach County in the Early American Period. Jackson was appointed Governor and organized the Territory of Florida into two counties, Escambia and St. Johns, the latter of the two included all of peninsular Florida. The legislative council for Florida met in Pensacola in 1822, and again in St. Augustine in 1823 (Tebeau 1971). These proceedings influenced the Treaty of Moultrie Creek (1823), which stipulated that all Native Americans in Florida move to a reservation in the middle of the peninsula. The Payne's Landing Treaty of 1832 reversed the previous agreement and required the Seminoles to relinquish their land within three years and move to reservations in the western United States.
Cultural Context 14 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
The conflict between American settlers and the Seminoles defined this period of Florida’s history and led to new sites of American influence in southeast Florida. When the three years had expired and the Payne's Landing Treaty was to be enforced, a large faction of the Seminoles, highly influenced by Osceola, began a long and bloody resistance. The Second Seminole War lasted from 1835 to 1842. During this conflict, the guerilla warfare tactics of the Seminoles and Florida’s swampy terrain challenged American forces. Before it ended, the Second Seminole War had spread into south Florida as far as Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades (Mahon 1992).
In the context of the Second Seminole War, General Thomas S. Jesup established Fort Jupiter along the Jupiter River, approximately 3 miles from the mouth of Jupiter Inlet, on January 25, 1838 (McGoun 1998; Roberts 1988). The previous day, Jesup, along with 500 horsemen and an artillery unit, had fought approximately 300 Seminoles at the Indian Crossing of the Loxahatchee River. While the Native Americans eventually retreated, Jesup suffered a facial wound, seven of his men were killed, and 30 more were wounded (Porter 1996). Jesup attempted to negotiate a peace settlement at Fort Jupiter in 1838. The Secretary of War rejected Jesup’s plan, and instead of renegotiating with the Seminoles, Jesup forced nearly 700 of them to migrate to the west against their will (Porter 1996; Roberts 1988). The Second Seminole War greatly constricted the remaining Seminole to a reservation in southern Florida (Mahon 1985). The new reservation included part of today’s Hardee County southward to Everglades National Park. The eastern and western boundaries of the reservation were well inland from the coast. The eastern boundary of the new reservation encompassed what later became the western part of Palm Beach County.
After the costly and lengthy Second Seminole War, the federal government passed the Armed Occupation Act of 1842 to encourage the settlement of Florida. This act brought new settlers to the areas between Lake Okeechobee and the Atlantic Coast. On August 4, 1842, any free head of family or single male over the age of 18 who could bear arms was eligible for 160 acres of free land, provided the person would live on the land for five years and farm a minimum of 5 acres. Nearly 200,000 acres of federal land south of present‐day Gainesville was offered up to prospective settlers (Covington 1959). The government passed the act in part to promote settlement of the Florida wilderness, but also to create a civilian buffer to help keep the Seminoles confined to their South Florida reservation. When the act came to an end in 1843, a total of 189,440 acres of Florida land were claimed through 1,184 permits (House of Representatives 1844; McGoun 1998).
Settlement within the Everglades and the land surrounding Lake Okeechobee required involved drainage and irrigation techniques, especially in regards to producing agriculture. Mounds and canals were not a new feature for nineteenth‐century settlers, as Native Americans had used these practices for their own purposes. What to do with the massive amounts of cultivatable land covered by swamps and waterways would be an important question in the earliest years of Florida’s statehood (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission n.d.; Grunwald 2006).
15 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
The Antebellum and Civil War Period, 1845–1865
Expansionist fervor in the mid‐nineteenth century brought new states into the Union across the country, and it also influenced Floridian and national politicians to consider developments within the Everglades that could bring it under more human control. This land could prove extremely valuable to the still young nation’s growth, especially in terms of agricultural production and settlement. Manifest Destiny dictated that Americans cover every corner of the continent, and this included the furthest southeastern swampland. Buckingham Smith, who had very little experience in the matter, was sent to survey the region by President James K. Polk at the urging of Florida Senator James Westcott. Though awed by the landscape in his writings, Smith believed the only course of action was to drain the swamps and waters to make way for more settlement and the development of citrus groves and other agriculture. After back and forth politicking among state senators, the Everglades was granted to the State of Florida in 1850 for improvements (Grunwald 2006).
The third and final Seminole War (1855–1858) consisted of a series of skirmishes fought by Seminoles under Chief Billy Bowlegs (Milanich 1995). Because of these events, the conflict is also referred to as Billy Bowleg’s War. During this period, forts were reactivated and war was again declared. Captain Joseph A. Haskin re‐established Fort Jupiter on a new site on February 21, 1855. Located on the south side of the Loxahatchee River, approximately 3 miles from Hobe Sound and a half mile from the original Fort Jupiter to the west, the fort was abandoned by September. Captain Joseph Roberts reoccupied the fort on April 14, 1857, and abandoned it on September 9, 1857 (Roberts 1988). By 1858, after a series of sporadic skirmishes, the Third Seminole War ended with the deportation of 123 Seminoles to Oklahoma. However, 100 to 300 Seminoles who evaded capture remained in the Everglades (Fernald and Purdum 1992). The present‐day Seminole and Miccosukee Tribes of Florida and the Independent Traditional Seminole Nation of Florida are direct descendants of these Seminoles who remained in Florida.
Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse was established in this period and became one of Palm Beach County’s first permanent settlements (McGoun 1998). Construction began in 1853, but the inlet silted shut in 1854, forcing 500 tons of construction materials to be shipped down the Indian River in small boats. Two years later, the Third Seminole War brought construction to a halt (McCarthy 1990). Workers finally finished the lighthouse in July 1860. Thomas Twiner, the lighthouse keeper, lit the light at this time (Holland 1972:128; McGoun 1998). The lighthouse was an important feature during the Civil War (1861–1865). At the start of the war, Confederate sympathizers extinguished the light in an attempt to thwart Union ships that patrolled the region. Similar actions were taken at other lighthouses along the coast of Florida (McCarthy 1990). The Jupiter light was re‐established after the war in 1866 (Holland 1972).
The Post‐Civil War and Late Nineteenth Century Period, 1865–1900
After the Civil War, a new wave of homesteaders began settling in Martin and Palm Beach Counties. Improvements to the Everglades, which had been put on hold during the sectional
Cultural Context 16 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report conflict, were reconsidered immediately following the war’s conclusion. Tracts of land within the swamps were sold to men who proposed to drain the land or create canals to reroute the waters. William H. Gleason was given hundreds of acres for $40 each in 1866; Silas L. Niblack also was tasked with maintaining large areas of the swamps. However, most of these granted proposals did little in the way of developing the area significantly, and much of the reclamation would not be accomplished until the twentieth century (Dovell 1947).
Captain Elisha Newton Dimick, known as the founder of Palm Beach, arrived in 1876 (Pandula 1989). He purchased 120 acres from the federal government in 1882 (General Land Office [GLO] 1882). Four years later, Irving R. Henry homesteaded 130 acres in what would become the business section of West Palm Beach (Federal Writers’ Project 1939; US Department of the Interior 1997). Valorus Orlando Spencer established the Lake Worth post office on May 21, 1880 (Bradbury and Hallock 1962; McGoun 1998). Judge A. E. Heuser, an early resident, named present‐day Riviera Beach “Oak Lawn” when he established a post office in 1889 (Bradbury and Hallock 1962; Morris 1995).
In general, Palm Beach County benefited from the arrival of Henry Morrison Flagler’s railroad in 1894 (Tebeau 1971). Flagler had amassed a fortune as a partner in the Standard Oil Company with John D. Rockefeller. Flagler built his first Florida hotel in St. Augustine in 1888. The Ponce de Leon, as it was called, housed as many as 450 guests and was the first major structure to utilize poured concrete (Gannon 1993). The success of this hotel led Flagler to build the less glamorous Alcazar and the Casa Monica (later known as the Cordova). In order to encourage tourists to frequent his hotels, Flagler bought and rebuilt the 36‐mile railway that linked Jacksonville to St. Augustine. He then stretched new lines southward to Miami and finally to Key West. Like his St. Augustine venture, Flagler built the palatial six‐story, 540‐room Royal Poinciana and the Palm Beach Inn (later renamed The Breakers) in Palm Beach and a $2.5 million mansion christened Whitehall (McGoun 1998).
Flagler transformed the region from an unincorporated rural farming community of approximately 1,000 people into a world‐famous resort (Tebeau 1971). While Palm Beach became a major destination for wealthy tourists, Flagler created West Palm Beach as a town for the hotel employees (McGoun 1998).
One of the earliest notable entrances of the US Army Corps of Engineers to this region was in 1895. Local entrepreneur, Fred M. Cabot, worked to develop and grow Flagler’s railroad in the region, and he had a major stake in providing supplies for the line. It was Cabot who contracted the US Army Corps of Engineers to come into Martin County in an effort to reshape areas in and around Jupiter, performing work on the Jupiter Narrows (1895) and the Jupiter Inlet (1896) (Snyder 2003).
Twentieth Century to the Present
With the arrival of the train and the birth of Palm Beach and West Palm Beach, the state legislature carved Palm Beach County out of Dade County on April 30, 1909 (Morris 1995).
17 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
West Palm Beach was designated the county seat (Dunn 1998). A year later, Palm Beach County boasted a population of 5,577, ranking it 39th out of 47 counties in terms of population (Dietrich 1978). During the Florida land boom of the 1920s, Palm Beach County’s population increased threefold between 1910 and 1920 and continued to surge. Even during the Great Depression, the county’s population swelled to reach more than 30,000 (State of Florida 1945). Palm Beach also blossomed from 1,707 to 3,747 during the same decade (State of Florida 1945). By 1945, 112,311 people called the county home, 40,599 of whom resided in West Palm Beach and 3,596 of whom lived in Palm Beach (State of Florida 1945). West Palm Beach became one of Florida’s 10 largest cities in 1950 with 43,162 inhabitants, and Palm Beach County was one of Florida’s 10 largest counties with 114,688 residents (Dovell 1952).
While northerners constitute a large portion of this population growth, immigrants from around the world have become important parts of Palm Beach’s social and economic fabric. Like Fort Lauderdale, Pompano Beach, Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lake Worth, Riviera Beach, Pahokee, Belle Glade, South Bay, and Miami, West Palm Beach has a sizeable Haitian community (Mohl and Pozzetta 1996). West Palm Beach is also home to a significant number of immigrants from Jamaica and Bangladesh (Mohl and Pozzetta 1996). Lake Worth continues to have a large Finnish population with the influx of new immigrants to its historic “Little Finland” district (Mohl and Pozzetta 1996).
Despite population increases and expanding urban boundaries in Palm Beach County, agriculture remains an important feature of the economy. In 1928, a devastating hurricane caused severe flooding and killed more than 2,000 people, spurring the development of Herbert Hoover Dike to control flooding near Lake Okeechobee. This flood control opened up much of the eastern half of Palm Beach County to agriculture (Pandula 1989).
Flood control and water management became larger points of concern in the post‐World War II era. In 1948, The Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) Project gained congressional authorization, and it became a major program in the 1950s and 1960s. The project tasked the US Army Corps of Engineers with creating levees, canals, and other redirection and drainage systems to make the Everglades more inhabitable and to reclaim the water sources for agriculture and human use, including the spread of cattle farming. This project proposed to completely take over the land and repurpose it, and it was “designed to control just about every drop of rain that landed on the region, in order to end the cycle of not‐enough‐water and too‐much water that had destabilized the frontier and stifled its growth” (Grunwald 2006:221).
The first step in the process was to separate useable land from the unusable; this was done with the construction of a 100‐mile north‐south levee that would separate the highly populated areas of the coast and some useable swamp land from the largely uninhabitable areas of the interior. Canals, drainage, and levees worked to reclaim the useable land and to bring it under human control. Though the larger project received its fair share of critiques, the reclamation of certain areas as wildlife refuges and manageable farmlands was certainly a major benefit. Voters overwhelmingly supported the project, as did the National Park Service and the US Fish
Cultural Context 18 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report and Wildlife Commission, with the latter managing the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge alongside the US Army Corps of Engineers (Grunwald 2006:222‐224).
The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (formerly the Game and Fish Commission) also played a role in maintaining these lands in the mid‐twentieth century. In 1947, the organization purchased land from a timber company, totaling 52,000 acres. The J. W. Corbett Wildlife Management Area was created; by the 1960s, new channels and canals were built in water redirection efforts (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission n.d.).
By 1992, 924 farms operated in the county, averaging 690 acres in size and controlling a total of 637,934 acres in the county. Sugar was by far the largest crop, consuming 351,440 acres and producing 13,410,532 tons of cane. Farmers also planted 84,624 acres in vegetables and 19,749 acres in citrus groves (US Census Bureau 1992). However, tourism still dominates the local infrastructure, as tourists around the world visit the beaches and lakeshores of Palm Beach County. This brings significant growth to the permanent population as well; by the early decades of the twenty‐first century, Palm Beach County has grown to around 1.4 million residents (US Census Bureau 2014).
19 Cultural Context January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
The Project area’s potential to contain cultural resources was evaluated by reviewing historic maps, FMSF records, previous surveys in the area, and the environmental context of the property. Environmental variables associated with pre‐Contact and early Euro‐American historic settlement (i.e., soil drainage, proximity to water or wetland resources, and relative elevation) were analyzed. Based on these factors, the Project area was considered to have a moderate potential for containing cultural resources.
PREVIOUSLY RECORDED CULTURAL RESOURCES
The FMSF database was reviewed for previous cultural resource surveys near the Project area (Table 2; Figure 6). To date, there have been eight cultural resource surveys within one mile of the APE, five of which were transportation related. Two previous surveys (FMSF Survey Nos. 1125 and 12061) included the area within the APE boundary. Survey No. 12061 was performed in 2005 and was a reconnaissance‐level survey with limited subsurface testing (no shovel tests were dug within the Project area). The FMSF does not include a plot of Survey No. 1125, which included a pedestrian survey from Seminole Road east, along SR 80, for a distance of an approximately 2 miles.
There are no previously recorded cultural resources within the current Project area, but there are three archaeological sites, two historic structures, and four linear resources within one mile of the Project area. These are summarized below.
Table 2. Previous Surveys within One Mile of the APE. Survey No. Title Date Cultural Resource Assessment of a Reported Seminole Indian Site (8‐PD‐2), Palm Beach 1125 1985 County, Florida (survey not mapped in FMSF data) Proposed replacement of the (collapsed) bridge over canal "D," approximately 800 feet 1843 1989 north of SR 80, Palm Beach County, Florida Cultural Resource Reconnaissance of State Road 80 (Southern Boulevard) from County 12061 2005 Road 880 to West of Forest Hill Boulevard, Palm Beach County, Florida Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the State Road 80 PD&E Study from County 18558 2011 Road 880 to Forest Hill Boulevard, Palm Beach County, Florida Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of Five Pond Sites Along State Road 80 from West 20294 Lion Country Safari Road to Forest Hill/Crestwood Boulevard, Palm Beach County, 2013 Florida (Financial Project ID # 419345‐2‐C2‐01) 20615 Phase I Cultural Resources Survey of PSTA Cell 2, STA 1 East, Palm Beach County, Florida 2011 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of the Wellington Environmental Preserve 21125 2014 Greenway Project Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of three Additional Pond Sites Along State Road 21502 80 from West Lion Country Safari Road to Forest Hill/Crestwood Boulevard, Palm Beach 2014 County, Florida (Financial Project ID #419345‐2‐C2‐02)
Background Research 20 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 6. Cultural resource surveys and cultural resources within one mile of the Project area.
21 Background Research January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Previously Recorded Cultural Resources
The FMSF lists three archaeological sites within one mile of the APE (Table 3; see Figure 6). Two of the sites, 8PB06252 and 8PB08212, are located approximately 1,500 meters southwest of the Project area. Site 8PB06252 is described as a prehistoric campsite with a midden associated with Glades II (AD 750–1200) and Glades III (AD 1000–1700) cultural periods. The site also contains nineteenth‐ and twentieth‐century artifacts. Site 8PB08212 is described as a Late Archaic habitation site. Both of these sites were recommended as eligible for inclusion in the NRHP by investigating archaeologists; however, neither has been evaluated for NRHP eligibility by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO).
Table 3. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites within One Mile of the APE. Site Number Site Name Site Type SHPO Evaluation of NRHP Eligibility 8PB00002 Barbour Seminole midden Not evaluated 8PB06252 Tommy Rhea Campsite (prehistoric) Not evaluated 8PB08212 Sunburst Habitation (prehistoric) Not evaluated Source: FMSF database.
The third site, 8PB00002, is reportedly a large Seminole midden, approximately 1,200 meters west of the Project area (see Figure 6). Originally recorded in 1945 by Thomas Barbour, the site’s location was generally described as a one‐acre site situated on the south bank of the Palm Beach Canal, approximately 15 miles west of the City of Pam Beach and about 1.25 miles west of the Town of Loxahatchee. The environment is described as “an island covered with cabbage palms.” The general area was revisited in 1985 by Robert Austin (FMSF Survey No. 1125) in an attempt to relocate the site. The investigation did not relocate the site, and it remains a general vicinity location in the FMSF.
Two historic structures and four linear resources have been recorded within one mile of the APE (Table 4; see Figure 6). The West Palm Beach Canal (8PB10331) is an NRHP‐eligible resource that runs parallel to the southern boundary of Project Area on the opposite side of Southern Boulevard (see Figure 6). The West Palm Beach Canal has been in use since its construction in 1917. It was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP in 2016.
Table 4. Previously Recorded Historic Structures and Linear Resources within One Mile of the APE. Site Year Site Name (Address) Resource Type Style SHPO Evaluation Number Built Thomas House (14413 Frame 8PB02057 Structure 1934 Not Evaluated by SHPO Tangerine Dr.) Vernacular Water Control District ca. Frame 8PB15305 Vehicle Building (245 W Structure Ineligible for NRHP 1958 Vernacular D Road) 8PB10331 West Palm Beach Canal Linear Resource (Canal) 1917 N/A Eligible for NRHP 8PB15307 “A” Road Canal Linear Resource (Canal) 1960 N/A Ineligible for NRHP 8PB15308 “D” Road Canal Linear Resource (Canal) 1960 N/A Ineligible for NRHP 8PB15310 Osley Farms Road Canal Linear Resource (Canal) 1960 N/A Ineligible for NRHP
Background Research 22 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Three additional canals, 8PB15307, 8PB15308, and 8PB15310, run perpendicular to 8PB10331. These canals, constructed in 1960, were determined ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP by the SHPO in 2011.
The two historic structures consist of a private residence and a building associated with the Water Control District. The private residence, 8PB02057 (Thomas House), was built in 1934 and has not been evaluated by SHPO for NRHP eligibility. Resource 8PB15305 (Water Control District Vehicle Building) is a ca. 1958 structure used to house vehicles for the Loxahatchee Groves Water Control District. The structure was determined ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP by SHPO in 2011.
HISTORIC MAP AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH REVIEW
Historic maps and aerial photographs were examined in order to identify past land use in the vicinity of the Project area. The earliest detailed maps consulted were GLO survey maps. The GLO maps were created by government land surveyors during the nineteenth century as part of the surveying, platting, and sale of public lands. These maps characteristically show landscape features such as vegetation, bodies of water, roads, and other features. The level of detail in GLO maps varies, with some also depicting structures, Native American villages, railroads, and agricultural fields. A GLO map of Township 43 South, Range 41 East created in 1845 shows no clear signs of development within or around the Project area (Figure 7) (GLO 1845). Widespread settlement in this area of South Florida, particularly outside of coastal communities, did not occur until the drainage projects in the early twentieth century provided more inhabitable/arable land. The Project area is shown in Section 31 with no natural or man‐ made features depicted inside or around it.
Palm Beach County remained part of Dade County for the latter half of the nineteenth century and into the early twentieth century. A county map from 1890 shows settlements along the Atlantic Coast, with very few inroads into the interior of the state (Norton 1890). Much of the interior portion of the county is illustrated as the Everglades, and townships surveys are not illustrated throughout this portion of the county. To this point, no railroads or other transportation lines are illustrated this far south in Florida.
Change would come in the early twentieth century and is evident in two ways on a 1917 highway map: railroads and roadways are evident traveling down the coastline, and drainage canals are illustrated from Lake Okeechobee to the Atlantic (Florida State Road Department [FSRD] 1917). One canal travels southeast from the lake before turning east and connecting with the coastline south of West Palm Beach. In 1926, this canal is labeled the West Palm Beach Canal (FSRD 1926). This map also shows a new highway, State Road (SR) 25, following the canal’s east‐west route. By 1939, a settlement is marked along SR 25 at Loxahatchee (FSRD 1939).
23 Background Research January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Figure 7. 1845 GLO map showing the Project area.
Background Research 24 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
An aerial photograph from the 1950s provides further details about developments within and around the Project area (Figure 8) (US Department of Agriculture [USDA] 1953). The above‐ mentioned canal and east‐west roadway (then US 98) are apparent south of the Project boundaries. Drainage or irrigation ditches are evident traveling east‐west through the top of the Project area, as well as four crossing north‐south inside the Project area boundary. These ditches do not appear to drain into the nearby canals. Though much of the land is cleared, trees and other vegetation are more apparent in the southeastern corner.
A 1971 topographic map confirms the general features of the land, though the drainage or irrigation ditches are not illustrated, further pointing to their importance only to local use (Figure 9) (US Geological Survey [USGS] 1971). Two structures are shown north of the Project area, one of which is designated as an agricultural building.
CULTURAL RESOURCE PROBABILITY
Based on the cultural and environmental background research provided above, the Project area was considered to have a low to moderate potential for encountering cultural deposits. Previously recorded resources, landforms, elevation, and proximity to fresh water were taken into account to consider the potential for prehistoric resources. The Project area is not adjacent to fresh water (aside from artificial canals, the closest water source is the Loxahatchee Slough, approximately 4 kilometers to the northeast); contains poorly‐drained soils (generally considered to contain a low potential to yield cultural deposits); and lacks areas of relative high elevation (often preferred campsites for prehistoric groups).
The general vicinity location of 8PB00002 also was taken into account, as this site has not been relocated (the recorded location is 1,200 meters west of the Project area). The written description of the site adjacent to the West Palm Beach Canal, on an island with cabbage palms, places the site in the vicinity of the canal, which is 100 meters south of the current Project area. However, the midden is described as being on the south side of the canal, whereas the Project area is to the north. In addition, 8PB00002 is described as being on an island with cabbage palms, whereas the Project area contains no observable change in elevation. The potential for prehistoric cultural deposits was therefore considered to be low.
Historic maps and photographs show no signs of historic activity beyond the construction of drainage ditches. No signs of structures or homesteads were found in the during the background research. If historic resources are present, it was expected that these would relate to the agricultural use or the construction of the canal and post‐date the construction of the canal (1917). The potential for historic artifacts was considered moderate.
25 Background Research January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Figure 8. 1953 USDA aerial photograph showing the Project area.
Background Research 26 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 9. 1971 USGS topographic map showing the Project area.
27 Background Research January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
METHODS
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
The field methodology employed for this Project included pedestrian survey of the Project area to identify aboveground features, areas of slightly higher elevation, and cultural material on the ground surface. In addition, 25 shovel tests were excavated across the parcel at approximately 50‐meter intervals on a preplanned grid.
Shovel tests were a minimum of 50 centimeters in diameter and were excavated to a depth of one meter (3.3 feet), unless impenetrable subsoil or the water table was encountered first. Sediments were screened for cultural material using 6.4‐millimeter (0.25‐inch) mesh screen. Shovel tests were backfilled upon completion. Representative soil profiles were photographed and field notes recorded stratigraphy, soil color, and texture. Shovel test locations were recorded with a handheld Garmin Global Positioning System (GPS) unit (UTM Zone 17 NAD 83).
LABORATORY METHODS AND CURATION
No artifacts were encountered during this investigation; therefore, no laboratory analysis was conducted. Field notes, maps, and other supporting documentation are curated at SEARCH’s Gainesville‐area office in Florida.
CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION AND INFORMANT INTERVIEWS
No individuals approached the crew while they were in the field, and no informants were found during the survey. The Town of Loxahatchee Groves is not a Certified Local Government (CLG). SEARCH contacted Christian Davenport, the County Historic Preservation Officer/Archaeologist for Palm Beach County, to inquire whether the County had any concerns about cultural resources in the Project area. SEARCH received a reply on January 14, 2019, that the staff had no jurisdiction for the proposed Project, which is not within unincorporated Palm Beach County (Appendix A). The letter also stated that they were not aware of any nonlinear historic resources within 500 feet of the Project area.
UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERIES
No evidence of cultural resources was found within the Project area as a result of this investigation. However, in the unlikely event that human remains or related artifacts are encountered, the stipulations of Chapter 872.05 (Offenses Concerning Dead Bodies and Graves)
Methods 28 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report should be followed. Construction should immediately cease, and the County Medical Examiner notified as to the findings. If the remains are found to be other than human, any construction will be cleared to proceed. If the remains are human and are less than 75 years old, the Medical Examiner and local law enforcement officials will assume jurisdiction. If the remains are found to be human and older than 75 years, the Medical Examiner will notify the State Archaeologist, and the Florida Division of Historical Resources (FDHR) may assume jurisdiction over and responsibility for the unmarked human burial (Appendix B).
29 Methods January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
RESULTS
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY RESULTS
A total of 25 shovel tests were excavated across the APE, all of which were negative for cultural material (Figure 10). Subsurface testing in the Project area indicated the soils are consistent with Riviera series, 0 to 2 percent slope. The soil profile of a typical shovel test included three strata: Stratum I (0‐10 centimeters below surface [cmbs]) gray fine sand; Stratum II (10‐ 60 cmbs) light gray fine sand; and Stratum III (60‐100 cmbs) brown fine sand with sandy clay inclusions (Figure 11).
A dry retention pond was encountered in the northwest portion of the property (see Figure 3). Aerial images from GoogleEarth show this pond was constructed after 2014. The pond contained no standing water, and the surface was covered in grass. One shovel test (Shovel Test 7) was excavated within the retention pond and encountered the water table at 95 cmbs. The remaining shovel tests were excavated to a depth of 100 cmbs without encountering water.
Pedestrian survey of the APE revealed modern refuse likely associated with the nearby Southern Boulevard or agricultural activities. These modern materials include fabric, fragments of cement, and metal (Figure 12). No cultural material more than 50 years old was encountered as a result of the survey. No archaeological sites were recorded, and no further archaeological survey is recommended.
ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY RESULTS
No architectural resources were anticipated in the survey area based on the background research described above. The pedestrian survey of the Project area found no evidence of buildings or structures within the survey area. Ditches visible on historic aerials were no longer active, but visible as slight linear depressions (Figure 13). No architectural resources were recorded as a result of the survey, and no further architectural history investigation is recommended.
The FDHR Survey Log Sheet is provided in Appendix C.
Results 30 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 10. Archaeological survey results.
31 Results January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Figure 11. Typical soil profile encountered within the Project area at N1800, E700, showing three strata.
Figure 12. Modern refuse within the Project area.
Results 32 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
Figure 13. Photograph facing south from N1800, E700, showing dry ditch.
33 Results January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
In December 2018, SEARCH completed a Phase I CRAS in support of the Loxahatchee Groves Project in Palm Beach County, Florida. The survey was conducted on behalf of ECT. The purpose of the survey was to identify cultural resources within the APE and to assess their potential for listing in the NRHP.
A total of 25 shovel tests were excavated within the APE, none of which contained cultural material. Surface inspection, conducted in conjunction with the shovel testing, also failed to yield cultural material in excess of 50 years old or evidence of architectural resources. No cultural resources were recorded. It is SEARCH’s opinion that the Loxahatchee Groves Project will have no impact on cultural resources listed on or eligible for listing in the NRHP. No further work is recommended.
Conclusion and Recommendation 34 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
REFERENCES CITED
Adams, William R., Daniel Schafer, Robert Steinbach, and Paul L. Weaver 1997 The Kings Road: Florida’s First Highway. Report on file FDHR, Tallahassee.
Andrews, Evangeline Walker and Charles McLean Andrews (editors) 1985 (1699) Jonathan Dickinson’s Journal or, God’s Protecting Providence. Being the Narrative of a Journey from Port Royal in Jamaica to Philadelphia between August 23, 1696 and April 1, 1697. Florida Classics Library, Port Salerno, Fla.
Boyd, Mark F., Hale G. Smith, and John W. Griffin 1951 Here They Once Stood: The Tragic End of the Apalachee Missions. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.
Bradbury, Alford G. and E. Story Hallock 1962 A Chronology of Florida Post Offices. 1993 Reprint. The Florida Federation of Stamp Clubs, n.p.
Brooks, H. K. 1974 Lake Okeechobee. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past, edited by P. J. Gleason, pp. 256‐286. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami.
Carr, Robert S. 1974 A Preliminary Investigation of Several Revolutionary War Military Sites in Florida. Prepared by Bureau of Historic Sites and Properties for Division of Parks and Resources, Miscellaneous Projects Report Series Number 16. Survey #2008, Florida Master Site File, Tallahassee, Florida. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39:231‐232.
Carr, Robert S., and J. G. Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man in South Florida. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past (2nd Edition), edited by P. J. Gleason, pp. 1‐14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami.
Carr, Robert S., Linda Spears Jester, James Pepe, and Willard S. Steele 1995 An Archaeological and Historical Assessment of Riverbend Park, Palm Beach County, Florida. Florida Master Site File Survey No. 4038. The Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc., Miami. Submitted to Palm Beach County, Florida.
Carr, Robert and W. Steele 1993 Seminole Heritage Survey, Seminole Sites of Florida. Report on file, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee.
35 References Cited January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Covington, James W. 1959 The Story of Southwestern Florida, Volume 1 and 2. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., NY.
Dietrich, T. Stanton 1978 The Urbanization of Florida’s Population: An Historical Perspective of County Growth. Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Gainesville.
Dovell, J. E. 1947 The Everglades Before Reclamation. Florida Historical Quarterly 26(1):1‐43. 1952 Florida: Historical, Dramatic, Contemporary. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc.
Dunn, Hampton 1998 Historic Florida Courthouses. Hallmark Publishing Company, Gloucester Point, VA.
Ehrenhard, J. E., R. S. Carr, and R. C. Taylor 1978 The Archaeological Survey of the Big Cypress National Preserve, Phase 1. Southeastern Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee. 1979 The Big Cypress National Preserve: Archaeological Survey Season 2. Southeastern Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee.
Ehrenhard, J. E. and R. S. Taylor 1980 The Big Cypress National Preserve: Archaeological Survey Season 3. Southeastern Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee.
Eriksen, John M. 1994 Brevard County: A History to 1955. Tampa, Fl: The Florida Historical Society Press.
Fairbanks, Charles H. 1973 The Florida Seminole People. Indian Tribal Series, Phoenix.
Federal Writers’ Project 1939 Florida: A Guide to the Southern Most State. Oxford University Press, NY.
Fernald, Edward A. and Elizabeth D. Purdum 1992 Atlas of Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission n.d. J. W. Corbett History. Electronic document, http://myfwc.comviewing/recreation/wmas/ lead/jw‐corbett/history/, accessed November 16, 2016.
Florida State Road Department (FSRD) 1917 Road Map, State of Florida. Electronic document, http://www.fdot.gov/geospatial/ FloridaTransportationMapArchive.shtm, accessed December 20, 2018.
References Cited 36 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
1926 Official Road Map of Florida. Electronic document, http://www.fdot.gov/geospatial/ FloridaTransportationMapArchive.shtm, accessed December 20, 2018. 1939 Official Road Map of Florida. Electronic document, http://www.fdot.gov/geospatial/ FloridaTransportationMapArchive.shtm, accessed December 20, 2018.
Furey, John F., Jr. 1972 The Spanish River Complex: Archaeological Settlement Patterning in Eastern Okeechobee Sub‐Area, Florida. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton.
Gannon, Michael 1983 Cross in the Sand: The Early Catholic Church in Florida, 1513‐1870. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville. 1993 Florida: A Short History. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 1996 First European Contacts. In The New History of Florida, edited by Michael Gannon, Pp. 16‐ 39. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
General Land Office (GLO) 1845 Survey Map of Township 43 South, Range 41 East. Electronic document, https://glorecords.blm.gov/, accessed December 18, 2018. 1882 Patent for Captain Elisha N. Dimick. Electronic document, https://glorecords.blm.gov/, accessed December 18, 2018.
Gleason, P. J., A. D. Cohen, W. G. Smith, H. K. Brooks, P. A. Stone, R. L. Goodrick, and W. Spackman Jr. 1974 The Environmental Significance of Holocene Sediments from the Everglades and Saline Tidal Plane. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past, edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 287‐341. Miami Geological Society memoir 2, Miami.
Gleason, P. J., and P. A. Stone 1975 Prehistoric Trophic Level Status and Possible Cultural Influences on the Enrichment of Lake Okeechobee. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach.
Goggin, John M. 1947 A Preliminary Definition of Archaeological Areas and Periods in Florida. American Antiquity 13:114‐127.
Griffin, John 1988 The Archeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeastern Archaeological Center, Tallahassee.
Griffin, Patricia C. 1990 Mullet on the Beach: The Minorcans of Florida, 1768‐1788. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
37 References Cited January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Grunwald, Michael 2006 The Swamp: The Everglades, Florida, and the Politics of Paradise. Simon & Schuster, New York.
Hale, Stephen 1989 Prehistoric Subsistence Strategies and Settlement Patterns in the Lake Okeechobee Basin of the South Florida Peninsula. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Holland, Jr., Francis Ross 1972 America’s Lighthouses: An Illustrated History. Dover Publications, Inc., New York
House of Representatives 1844 Actual Settlements in Florida, Under the Armed Occupation Law. Document Number 70, 28th Congress, 1st Session.
Jester, Linda Spears, William Jerald Kennedy, Jim Pepe, Nancy Sinks, and Ryan Wheeler 1993 Archaeological Survey and Excavations at the Jupiter Inlet 1 Site (8PB34), Dubois Park, Palm Beach County, Florida. Survey #3549. Florida Atlantic University, Department of Anthropology, Boca Raton. On file, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee.
Jester, Linda Spears, William Jerald Kennedy, Jim Pepe, Nancy Sinks, and W. Steele 1994 A Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of the Shunk, Loxahatchee River Corridor, and Eastern Loxahatchee Slough Tracts, Palm Beach County, Florida and Phase II Archaeological Survey of the Shunk and Loxahatchee River Corridor Tracts, Palm Beach County, Florida. Survey #3768. Department of Anthropology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. On file, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee.
Kennedy, William J., Charles Roberts, Shih‐Lung Shaw, and Ryan J. Wheeler 1991 Prehistoric Resources in Palm Beach County: A Preliminary Predictive Study. Survey #3031. Report Submitted to Palm Beach County by Department of Anthropology, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. On file, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee.
Lyon, Eugene 1976 The Enterprise of Florida: Pedro Menendez de Aviles and the Spanish Conquest of 1565‐ 1568. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville.
Mahon, John K. 1985 History of the Second Seminole War, 1835‐1842. Revised Edition. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. 1992 History of the Second Seminole War, 1835‐1842. Revised Edition. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.
References Cited 38 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
McCarthy, Kevin M. 1990 Florida Lighthouses. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.
McDowell, L. L., J. C. Stephens, and E. H. Stewart 1969 Radiocarbon Chronology of the Florida Everglades Peat. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 33:743‐745.
McGoun, William E. 1998 Southeast Florida Pioneers: The Palm & Treasure Coasts. Pineapple Press, Sarasota.
Milanich, Jerald T. 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 1995 Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Milanich, Jerald T. and Charles Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press, Cambridge, MA.
Mohl, Raymond A. and George E. Pozzetta 1996 From Migration to Multiculturalism: A History of Florida Immigration. In The New History of Florida, edited by Michael Gannon, Pp. 391‐417. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Morris, Allen 1995 Florida Place Names. Pineapple Press, Sarasota, Fl.
Newman, Christine L., and Brent R. Weisman 1992 Prehistoric and Historic Settlement in the Guana Tract, St. Johns County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 45(2): 162‐171
Norton, Charles Ledyard 1890 A Handbook of Florida. Longman, Greens, and Co., New York. Electronic document, https://fcit.usf.edu/florida/maps/, accessed September 4, 2018.
Pandula, Eugene 1989 Palm Beach. In Guide to Florida’s Historic Architecture, Pp. 132‐134. University of Florida Press, Gainesville.
Porter, Kenneth 1996 The Black Seminoles: History of a Freedom‐Seeking People. Revised and edited by Alcione M. Amos and Thomas P. Senter. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Quinn, Jane 1975 Minorcans in Florida, Their History and Heritage. Mission Press, St. Augustine.
39 References Cited January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
Roberts, Robert B. 1988 Encyclopedia of Historic Forts: The Military, Pioneer, and Trading Posts of the United States. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York.
Rohling, E. J., M. Fenton, F. J. Jorissen, P. Bertrant, G. Ganssen, and J. P. Caulet. 1998 Magnitudes of Sea‐Level Lowstands of the past 500, 000 years. Nature 394:162‐165.
Romans, Bernard 1962 (1775) Concise History of East and West Florida – Volume I. University of Florida Press Facsimile and Reprint Series, Gainesville.
Sears, William H. 1982 Fort Center: An Archaeological Site in the Lake Okeechobee Basin. University Presses of Florida, Gainesville.
Snyder, James D. 2003 Five Thousand Years on the Loxahatchee: A Pictorial History of Jupiter/Tequesta, Florida. Pharos Books, Jupiter.
State Archives of Florida 2013 Spanish Land Grants. Florida Memory homepage, electronic document, http://www.floridamemory.com/Collections/SpanishLandGrants/, accessed April 24, 2013.
State of Florida 1945 The Seventh Census of the State of Florida, 1945. State of Florida, Tallahassee.
Sturtevant, William C. 1953 Chakaika and the ‘Spanish Indians’: Documentary Sources Compared with Seminole Traditions. Tequesta 13:35‐73.
Tebeau, Charlton W. 1971 A History of Florida. Revised 1980. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables, Fl.
US Census Bureau 1992 Census of Agriculture. Electronic document, http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/, accessed March 17, 2016. 2014 QuickFacts: Palm Beach County, FL. Electronic document, http://www.census.gov/, accessed March 17, 2016.
US Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1953 Aerial Photographs of Palm Beach County, FL. Electronic document, https://ufdc.ufl.edu/aerials/map/, accessed December 18, 2018.
References Cited 40 SEARCH January 2019 Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida Draft Report
US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS) 2019 Soil Survey of Palm Beach County. Electronic document, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed January 10, 2019.
US Department of the Interior 1997 General Land Office, Automated Records Project, Pre‐1908 Patents: Homestead, Cash Entry, Armed Occupation Act & Private Land Claims Cadastral Survey Plat Index 1824 to Present. Florida CD Rom (Release 2).
US Geological Survey (USGS) 1971 Topographic Map of Loxahatchee, FL. Electronic document, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/ topoview/viewer/, accessed December 18, 2018.
Ward, James R. 1985 Old Hickory's Town. Old Hickory's Town, Inc., Jacksonville, Fl.
Watts, W. A. 1969 A Pollen Diagram from Mud Lake, Marion County, North‐Central Florida. Geological Society of America Bulletin 80:631‐642. 1971 Postglacial and Interglacial Vegetation History of Southern Georgia and Central Florida. Ecology 52:676‐690. 1975 A Late Quaternary Record of Vegetation from Lake Annie, South Central Florida. Geology 3:344‐346. 1980 The Late Quaternary Vegetation History of the Southeastern United States. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 11:387‐409.
Williams, J. Raymond 1975 Proposed Port of Palm Beach Dredging, Palm Beach County, Florida. On file, Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee.
Wheeler, Ryan J. 1992 Riviera Complex: An East Okeechobee Archaeological Area Settlement. The Florida Anthropologist 45(1): 5‐17
Wright, J. Leitch, Jr. 1975 British St. Augustine. Historic St. Augustine Preservation Board, St. Augustine. 1976 Florida in the American Revolution. University of Florida Presses, Gainesville.
41 References Cited January 2019 SEARCH Draft Report Phase I CRAS of the Loxahatchee Groves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida
This page intentionally left blank.
References Cited 42
APPENDIX A.
CORRESPONDENCE
~~Clfco~ ~ i c:i.. -< • • • .t-{OR\1>~
January 14, 2019 Department of Planning, Zoning &. Building Lillian Azevedo, Ph.D., RPA 2300 North Jog Road Search-Search2o West Palm Beach. FL 3341 1-2741 8298 Bayberry Road, Suite 1 (56 I) 233-5000 Jacksonville, Florida 32256
Planning Division 233-5300 RE: Historical and Archaeological Resource Review for the following Zoning Division 233-5200 PCN: 41-41-43-17-01-804-0030. Building Division 233-5100 Code Enforcement 233-5500 Contractors Certification 233-5525 Dear Ms. Azevedo: Administration Office 233-5005 Executive Office 233-5228 This correspondence is in reply to your request for a review of the above www.pbcgov.com/pzb referenced property in regards to the identification of any cultural resources (historical and archaeological resour~es) located on or withir) 500 feet of the • property . Staff has no jurisdiction for the proposed project which is not within Palm Beach Cou.nty unincorporated Palm Beach County. The following information is only advisory, Board of County there are no known nonlinear historic resources within the area of potential effect Commissioners of the proposed undertaking.
Mack Bernard. Mayor However, should any artifacts or skeletal remains be encountered during Dave Kerner. Vice Mayor construction, per Florida Statue 872, construction must stop around the remains
Hal R. Valeche and the local sheriff and medical examiner contacted.
Gregg K. Weiss Should you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (561) 233- 5331 . Robert S. Weinroth
Mary Lou Berger Sincerely,
Melissa McKinlay
Christian Davenport, MA, RPA County Historic Preservation Officer/ Archeologist County Administrator
Verdenia C. Baker C: Patricia Behn, PBC Interim Planning Director Bryan Davis, Principal Planner, PBC Planning Division
T:\Plannlng\Art:haeology\County Depanments\PlaM1ng\land Use Amendments and Development Review\Search-Search.20\PCN 41-41-43-17--01- 840--0030 letter 1-14-2019 doc
·1111 Equal Opporcuni1y Affirmative Action Employer·
~ printed on sustainable W and recycled paper
APPENDIX B.
UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERIES PLAN
UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERIES OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC SITES INCLUDING HUMAN REMAINS
Although a Project area may receive a complete cultural resource assessment survey, it is impossible to ensure that all cultural resources will be discovered. Even at sites that have been previously identified and assessed, there is a potential for the discovery of previously unidentified archaeological components, features, or human remains that may require investigation and assessment. Therefore, a procedure has been developed for the treatment of any unexpected discoveries that may occur during site development.
If unexpected cultural resources are discovered the following steps should be taken:
1) Initially, all work in the immediate area of the discovery should cease and reasonable efforts should be made to avoid or minimize impacts to the cultural resources. 2) A qualified Professional Archaeologist should be contacted immediately and should evaluate the nature of the discovery. 3) The Archaeologist should then contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and if necessary, the State Archaeologist. 4) As much information as possible concerning the cultural resource, such as resource type, location, and size, as well as any information on its significance, should be provided to the SHPO. 5) Consultation with the SHPO should occur in order to obtain technical advice and guidance for the evaluation of the discovered cultural resource. 6) If necessary, a mitigation plan should be prepared for the discovered cultural resource. This plan should be sent to the SHPO for review and comment. The SHPO should be expected to respond with preliminary comments within two working days, with final comments to follow as quickly as possible. 7) If a formal data recovery mitigation plan is required, development activities in the near vicinity of the cultural resource should be avoided to ensure that no adverse impact to the resource occurs until the mitigation plan can be executed.
If human remains are encountered during site development, the stipulations of Chapter 872.05 (Offenses Concerning Dead Bodies and Graves) should be followed. All work in the near vicinity of the human remains should cease and reasonable efforts should be made to avoid and protect the remains from additional impact. In cases of inclement weather, the human remains should be protected with tarpaulins. A qualified Professional Archaeologist should be retained to investigate the reported discovery, inventory the remains and any associated artifacts, and assist in coordinating with state and local officials. The County Medical Examiner should be immediately notified as to the findings. If the remains are found to be other than human, any construction will be cleared to proceed. If the remains are human, and are less than 75 years old, the Medical Examiner and local law enforcement officials will assume jurisdiction. If the
remains are found to be human and older than 75 years, the State Archaeologist should be notified and may assume jurisdiction of the remains.
1) If jurisdiction is assumed by the State Archaeologist, (s)he will a) determine whether the human remains represent a significant archaeological resource, and b) make a reasonable effort to identify and locate persons who can establish direct kinship, tribal community, or ethnic relationship with the remains. If such a relationship cannot be established, then the State Archaeologist may consult with a committee of four to determine the proper disposition of the remains. This committee shall consist of a human skeletal analyst, two Native American members of current state tribes recommended by the Governor's Council on Indian Affairs, and “an individual who has special knowledge or expertise regarding the particular type of the unmarked human burial.” 2) A plan for the avoidance of any further impact to the human remains and/or mitigative excavation, reinterment, or a combination of these treatments will be developed in consultation with the State Archaeologist, the SHPO, and if applicable, appropriate Indian tribes or closest lineal descendants. All parties will be expected to respond with advice and guidance in an efficient time frame. Once the plan is agreed to by all parties, the plan will be implemented.
The points of contact for Florida are:
Dr. Timothy Parsons, Director and State Historic Preservation Officer Florida Division of Historical Resources R.A. Gray Building 500 S. Bronough St. Tallahassee, FL 32399‐0250 PH: 850‐245‐6333
Dr. Mary Glowacki, Chief and State Archaeologist Bureau of Archaeological Research B. Calvin Jones Center for Archaeology at the Governor Martin House 1001 de Soto Park Drive Tallahassee, FL 32301 PH: 850‐245‐6301
APPENDIX C.
FDHR SURVEY LOG SHEET
3DJH
(QW ' )06) RQO\ BBBBBBBBBB 6XUYH\ /RJ 6KHHW 6XUYH\ )06) RQO\ BBBBBBBBB )ORULGD 0DVWHU 6LWH )LOH 9HUVLRQ
&RQVXOW *XLGH WR WKH 6XUYH\ /RJ 6KHHW IRU GHWDLOHG LQVWUXFWLRQV
,GHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG %LEOLRJUDSKLF ,QIRUPDWLRQ
6XUYH\ 3URMHFW QDPH DQG SURMHFW SKDVH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBPhase I Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Loxahatchee B BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBGroves Project, Palm Beach County, Florida BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HSRUW 7LWOH H[DFWO\ DV RQ WLWOH SDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBPhase I Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Loxahatchee GrovesBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBProject, Palm Beach County, Florida BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HSRUW $XWKRUV DV RQ WLWOH SDJH ODVW QDPHV ILUVW . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAzevedo, Lillian . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 3XEOLFDWLRQ 'DWH \HDU BBBBBBBBBB2019 7RWDO 1XPEHU RI 3DJHV LQ 5HSRUW FRXQW WH[W ILJXUHV WDEOHV QRW VLWH IRUPV BBBBBBBBBBB41 3XEOLFDWLRQ ,QIRUPDWLRQ *LYH VHULHV QXPEHU LQ VHULHV SXEOLVKHU DQG FLW\. )RU DUWLFOH RU FKDSWHU FLWH SDJH QXPEHUV. 8VH WKH VW\OH RI $PHULFDQ $QWLTXLW\. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBOn file at SEARCH, Newberry, FL. SEARCH Project No. E18274. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 6XSHUYLVRUV RI )LHOGZRUN HYHQ LI VDPH DV DXWKRU 1DPHV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAzevedo, Lillian $IILOLDWLRQ RI )LHOGZRUNHUV 2UJDQL]DWLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBSoutheastern Archaeological Research &LW\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBJacksonville .H\ :RUGV3KUDVHV 'RQuW XVH FRXQW\ QDPH RU FRPPRQ ZRUGV OLNH DUFKDHRORJ\ VWUXFWXUH VXUYH\ DUFKLWHFWXUH HWF . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBCanal .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
6XUYH\ 6SRQVRUV FRUSRUDWLRQ JRYHUQPHQW XQLW RUJDQL]DWLRQ RU SHUVRQ GLUHFWO\ IXQGLQJ ILHOGZRUN 1DPH. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2UJDQL]DWLRQ. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBEnvironmental Consulting and Technology, Inc. $GGUHVV3KRQH(PDLO. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HFRUGHU RI /RJ 6KHHW BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAzevedo, Lillian 'DWH /RJ 6KHHW &RPSOHWHG BBBBBBBBBBB
,V WKLV VXUYH\ RU SURMHFW D FRQWLQXDWLRQ RI D SUHYLRXV SURMHFW" T 1R T 0DSSLQJ &RXQWLHV /LVW HDFK RQH LQ ZKLFK ILHOG VXUYH\ ZDV GRQH DWWDFK DGGLWLRQDO VKHHW LI QHFHVVDU\ . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBPalm Beach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s at 50-meter intervals across Project area plus pedestrian inspectionBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBof exposed ground. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 3UHOLPLQDU\ 0HWKRGV FKHFN DV PDQ\ DV DSSO\ WR WKH SURMHFW DV D ZKROH T )ORULGD $UFKLYHV *UD\ %XLOGLQJ T OLEUDU\ UHVHDUFK ORFDO SXEOLF T ORFDO SURSHUW\ RU WD[ UHFRUGV T RWKHU KLVWRULF PDSV T )ORULGD 3KRWR $UFKLYHV *UD\ %XLOGLQJ T OLEUDU\VSHFLDO FROOHFWLRQ QRQORFDO T QHZVSDSHU ILOHV T VRLOV PDSV RU GDWD T 6LWH )LOH SURSHUW\ VHDUFK T 3XEOLF /DQGV 6XUYH\ PDSV DW '(3 T OLWHUDWXUH VHDUFK T ZLQGVKLHOG VXUYH\ T 6LWH )LOH VXUYH\ VHDUFK T ORFDO LQIRUPDQW V T 6DQERUQ ,QVXUDQFH PDSV T DHULDO SKRWRJUDSK\ T RWKHU GHVFULEH . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB $UFKDHRORJLFDO 0HWKRGV FKHFN DV PDQ\ DV DSSO\ WR WKH SURMHFW DV D ZKROH T &KHFN KHUH LI 12 DUFKDHRORJLFDO PHWKRGV ZHUH XVHG. T VXUIDFH FROOHFWLRQ FRQWUROOHG T VKRYHO WHVWRWKHU VFUHHQ VL]H T EORFN H[FDYDWLRQ DW OHDVW [ P T VXUIDFH FROOHFWLRQ XQFRQWUROOHG T ZDWHU VFUHHQ T VRLO UHVLVWLYLW\ T VKRYHO WHVWwVFUHHQ T SRVWKROH WHVWV T PDJQHWRPHWHU T VKRYHO WHVWw VFUHHQ T DXJHU WHVWV T VLGH VFDQ VRQDU T VKRYHO WHVW w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