Field walls, a quarry, cupmarks and bodedot were excavated, but no datable finds were discovered. A single conical cupmark (L106; upper diam. 0.48 m, lower diam. 0.2 m, depth 0.4 m), a depression (L107; diam. 0.18 m, depth 8 cm) and another cupmark (L108; diam. 0.5 m, depth 0.3 m) were revealed on a bedrock surface (L109; Figs. 2, 3). The cupmarks and the depression contained clean brown alluvium devoid of finds; thus, the surface could not be dated. 
Field Wall 113 (overall length 10 m, max. width 0.7 m; Fig. 4) was discovered at the end of a bedrock ledge, above a large depression. It is oriented northwest–southeast and is built in three sections (W113–W115), constructed of one course of fieldstones (0.4 × 0.6 – 0.6 × 0.8 m) arranged in a single row. The wall sections are separated by flat bedrock surfaces. The wall was discovered exposed, with no adjoining soil. No finds were recovered that could provide a date for the wall except for several body sherds of ribbed pottery vessels whose connection to the wall is unclear.
Field Wall 116 (Fig. 5) is east of W113, inside a deep depression in the bedrock (c. 3 m below the level of W113). Both the orientation and the construction of the wall are similar to W113, but it is not as well-preserved. The wall consists of eastern and western parts. The eastern part is built of large stones (average size 0.5 × 0.5 m), while the western part is more massive and is constructed of boulders (up to 0.8 m per side). The alluvium near the wall was excavated and several of the wall’s stones were dismantled, but no finds were discovered that could aid in its dating.
A bedrock surface with a rock-cut step (length 1. 7 m) was discovered west of the field walls. Several installations (Fig. 6) were hewn in the surface, including a conical cupmark (L110; upper diam. 0.65 m, lower diam. 0.25 m, depth 0.39 m), a shallow depression (L111; diam. 0.14 m, depth 8 cm) and a cupmark (L112; diam. c. 0.5 m, depth 0.34 m). In the cupmarks and the depression was brown alluvium, devoid of finds.
Quarry (c. 4 × 4 m; Figs. 7, 8). Hewn channels and stone blocks that had not been detached were discovered in a quarry exposed on a bedrock protrusion in the northern part of the excavation area. A square pit (L117; 1 × 1 m, depth 1. 2 m) located in its northwestern corner was probably an ancient installation, possibly the collecting vat of a winepress that ceased use and was turned into a quarry. The pit was filled with brown silt containing several non-diagnostic ribbed body fragments; thus, the exact date of the pit’s hewing and when the quarry operated remain unknown. Nevertheless, a considerable amount of time presumably passed between the last use of the ancient installation and the time when it was converted into a quarry: a large stone that obviously had been detached from the quarry covered Pit 117 after the latter was completely filled with brown alluvium.
Field Wall 105 (length 7.5 m; Fig. 9), aligned northwest–southeast, is near the western end of the excavation area. It is built of one course of large fieldstones (average size 0.5 × 0.5 m), arranged in a single straight row on the bedrock or on soil fill that was used to level deep pockets in the bedrock. The soil excavated on both sides of the wall, beneath it and between its stones yielded several abraded ribbed sherds, insufficient for dating the wall.
Bodeda L100 (diam. 1 m, depth c. 0.2 m; Figs. 10, 11) was discovered at the western end of the excavation area. Next to it was a round depression that may have been partly hewn. This was probably a simple installation for extracting olive oil consisting of a shallow crushing surface and a depression into which the oil would drain. No datable finds were discovered.
Evidence of ancient activity was discovered in the excavation areas at the northern end of the spur overlooking Nahal Yarmut. The cupmarks, bodedot, field walls and quarry reflect many years of activity that might have begun as early as the biblical period (cupmarks) and continued until the modern era (the field walls?). However, without datable finds it is impossible to determine which installation belongs to which period. Apparently, the activity conducted there was related to processing agricultural products, demarcating cultivation plots and quarrying stones.