.~'l; ~ Roger Morris Park (Morris-Jumel Mansion) Emergency Cultural Resource Monitoring Project New York, New York. Project Number: M073-105M I I Final Report Prepared for: Submitted to: City of New York - Department of Parks and Recreation DeU-Tech Enterprises, Inc. Olmstead Center; Queens, New York One Pinnacle Court Dix HiUs, New York 11786 Cityof New York- Landmarks Preservation Commission I New York, New York and The Historic House Trust - City of New York - Department of Parks and Recreation New York, New York Prepared by: Alyssa Loorya, M..A., RP .A., Principal Investigator and Christopher Ricciardi, Ph.D., R.P..A.. March 2005 I I 1 Roger Morris Park (Morris-Jumel Mansion) Emergency Cultural Resource Monitoring Project New York, New I York. Project Number: M073-105M I I I I I I: Final Report I Prepared for: Submitted to: I City of New York - Department of Parks and Recreation Dell-Tech Enterprises, Inc. Olmstead Center; Queens, New York One Pinnacle Court Dix Hills, New York 11786 1 City of New York - Landmarks Preservation Commission New York, New York I and The Historic House Trust - I City of New York - Department of Parks and Recreation New York, New York I Prepared by: Alyssa Loorya, M.A., R.P.A., Principal Investigator I and Christopher Ricciardi, Ph.D., R.P.A. March 2005 I I I I MANAGEMENT SUMMARY I In December 2004 and January 2005, an emergency cultural resource monitoring of the repair to the retaining wall surrounding Roger Morris Park, home to the Morris-Jumel Mansion, in New I York, New York (Project Number: M073-105M) was undertaken on behalf of the City of New York Department of Parks and Recreation. Dell-Tech Enterprises, Incorporated was hired by the Parks Department to conduct the necessary repair. The Cultural Resource Request for Proposal I called for archaeological monitoring of all subsurface excavation work prior to the installation of a new drainage line along the perimeter of the southern fieldstone fence line. I No cultural resource materials and/or features were uncovered during the excavation for the reconstruction of the retaining wall and installation of new drain lines, which were placed approximately sixteen (16) inches below surface. The matrix of the soil consisted almost I completely of unmortared stones that were packed together with loose dirt. It is the recommendation of this report, based on the make-up of the subsoil, that no further I cultural resource work be required if repairs to this section of the wall are required in the future. I I I I I I I I I 1. I I I I TALBE OF CONTENTS I Page: Management Summary I Table of Content 11 List of Images III I Acknowledgements IV 1. Introduction 1 II. Background History 2 I III. Archaeological Monitoring 3 IV. Summary and Recommendations 7 I V. References 7 Appendices I A - Archaeological Scope of Work 8 B- Site Map 11 C - Other Images 14 I D-C.V. 18 I I I I I I I ii I I I I I LIST OF IMAGES AND MAPS -._ -;'I I Title: Page: I Figure 01. Morris-Jumel Mansion 1 Figure 02. Southern wall prior to full collapse 2 Figure 03. Interior of southern fence line prior to excavation 3 I Figure 04. Southern sloping wall - after collapse 3 Figure 05. Southern wall prior to excavation work 4 Figure 06. Manhattan mica-schist fieldstone 4 I Figure 07. Southern wall after the collapse 5 Figure 08. Loose soil and rock 5 Figure 09. Brick used to repair the preexisting retaining wall 6 I Figure 10. Brick embossed with DBC - from repair to existing retaining wall 6 Figure 11. Site Map I Appendix C - Other Images: Figure 12 Excavation of wall area 14 I Figure 13 Rocky subsurface make-up of project area 14 Figure 14 Excavation for drain line 15 I Figure 15 Excavation for new drain line 15 I **NOTE: All images were taken by Christopher Ricciardi I I I I I I III I I I I ACKNOWELDGEMENTS I The authors wish to thank Dell-Tech Enterprises, Inc., the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation and the Historic House Trust for the chance to work on this project. We would I also like to thank Amanda Sutphin, Director of Archaeology at the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission for advice, comments and consultation. Paul Eng from the Parks Department was especially helpful during this project. Finally, the Dell-Tech foreman and crew I were diligent and professional in their work in relation to the archaeological monitoring project. I I I I 'i' . I I I I I I I I IV I I I. Introduction: Between December 2004 and January 2005 cultural resource monitoring was undertaken at Roger Moms Park, home of the Morris-Jumel Mansion in New York, New York (Project Number: M073-~05M) (Figure Ol)as part of an emergency repair project. Under contract to Den-Tech Enterprises, Incorporated and the City of New York Department of Parks and Recreation (Parks), the Scope of Work called for the monitoring of the excavation and disassembly of the pre-existing collapsed retaiining wan and the installation of a new subsurface drainage Une. Work was undertaken by Alyssa Loorya, M.A., RP.A. (principle Investigator) and assisted by Christopher Ricciardi, Ph.D., RP.A.. I II Figure 0 I: Morris-Jumel Mansion During the last week of December 2004, a portion of the southern retaining wall around Roger I Moms Park collapsed (Figure 02). Parks put out an 'emergency contract to repair the two sections of wall that buckled as well as the installation of a new drainage line, approximately sixteen (16) inches below ground surface and running parallel along the wall Monitoring was requested by Parks since the Park and the Mansion are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in keeping with the New York City Environmental Quality Review Act of 1977 (as amended) (Beame 1977). Due to the significance of the house and grounds, Parks determined that archaeological monitoring should occur for all excavation work, A documentary study was not required as part I of this emergency work. Previous archaeological investigations of the site are well documented and 'contain detailed histories. I I 1 II: Background History: As stated, due to the emergency nature of the project, a documentary study was not part of the Scope of Work for this project, There have been several other in-depth Cultural Resource projectsat the Park and Mansion that provide historical background. For detailed historical I information on. the Park and house see Stone (2000) and Pickman (1994). All previous archaeological reports were reviewed, as part of this project. I Thearea in which the present day house is situated was originaily known as the Great Marne Land. The earliest European owners of'the property were Jan Kiersen followed by James Carroll. The property, which is the second highest point in Manhattan., was purchased by Roger I Morris in 1763. Morris built the existing house between 1765 and 1770. Duringthe Revolutionary War, George W.asbington briefly used the house as a headquarters (Stone 2000:4) I and returned. for a visit following the Revohrtienary War (Moss 2005). Following several changes in ownership, the house WaS purchased by Stephen Jumel in. uno. After Jumel's passing in 1832. his widow, Eliza married Arron Burr, who still was dishonored I with regard tohis actions duringthe Revolutionary War. The house remainedin the family until the last half of the nineteenth century. By 1882 portions of the property had been sold bringing it to its current size .. The house and property were sold to the City of New York in 1903. Four I years later the Daughters of the American Revolution opened. the house as a museum (Stone 2000:5). !I Although the house remains on its original orientation, its originallyexpaasive lands had! been sold off by the twentieth. century, The house and landscape have repeatedly been modified to reflect the status of the family residing there. During the twentieth century the grounds underwent maintenance and its role today is to serve as a public park and a museum (Moss 2005). I I 'I I !I I Figure 02: Southern retaining wall prior to collapse I 2 Ii I I III Archaeological Monitoring: I I I I I Figure 03: Interior of south em fence line prior to excavation I As part of the emergency repair contract, two tasks were required: the repair of the buckled. wall, which compromised the integrity of the 'entire wall and the installation of new drainage lines along the interiorperimeter of the southern fence line (Figure 03). Dueto the extreme slope of I the property it was not possible for the contractors to disassemble the wan without first excavationbehind the wall. Due to the slope and rocky nature of the grounds a baekhow was used to facilitate the excavation (Figure 04). The area of the collapse was approximately ten (10) I feet in length of the walt :1 I I I :1 - I I Figure 04: Southern sloping walt - after collapse I 3 I' II The proposed plancalled for the excavation of approximately ten (10) feet behind the retaining :1 wall to allow for the inssalletion of metal sheet shoring that would then allow the mortared I fieldstone wall to be carefully removed prior to reconstruction (Figure 05) I I II I I I Figure 05: Southern wall prior to excavation work Excavations revealed that the area adjacent to the retaining wall was comprised mostly of large fieldstone Manhattan mica-schist rocks.