TOWN OF GREATER NAPANEE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
A G E N D A
NOVEMBER 5, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. Town Hall Committee Room (Upstairs), 124 John Street, Napanee
Page
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
2.1 Adopt Agenda Recommendation: That the agenda of the Municipal Heritage Committee dated November 5, 2015 be hereby adopted.
3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
3 - 5 3.1 Municipal Heritage Committee Meeting - October 1, 2015 Recommendation: That the minutes of the Municipal Heritage Committee dated October 1, 2015 are hereby approved.
4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
4.1. Heritage Designations
4.1.1 Designated Properties Tour - Dennis Mills will lead a tour of properties near the Market Square area for approximately 30 minutes.
4.1.2 Designation By-laws Research Update
4.1.3 Listing Sub-committee Update (Gillespie, Lovell, Mills, Rustige and Ronald)
4.1.4 Incentive Programs Sub-committee Update (Gillespie, Lovell and Boston)
4.2. Heritage Awareness and Education
4.2.1 Gibbard/McPherson Homes Tour Update - Jane Lovell
6 - 46 4.2.2 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment by ABACUS Archaeological Services
47 - 58 4.2.3 CHO News - Fall 2015
59 4.2.4 CHO News - Request for Heritage Stories or Photos for Bulletin Content
60 - 83 4.2.5 Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2015
Page 1 of 85 MUNICIPAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE - November 5, 2015 Agenda
Page
4.2.6 Heritage Photo Project Update - Fran Koch
4.3. Community Recognition
5. NEW BUSINESS
84 - 85 5.1 Demolition of 18 Water Street East - The structure is a batten and board frame dwelling appearing with a cluster of buildings on the 1874 Bird's Eye View map and possibly related to the Madden Tannery property (already designated). The house also appears in a circa 1905 postcard - details certainly suggest a 19th century date.
6. NEXT MEETING
6.1 Next Meeting: Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 4:00 p.m.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Page 2 of 85 TOWN OF GREATER NAPANEE MUNICIPAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Minutes of Meeting Held October 1, 2015 at 4:00 PM Committee Room, Town Hall, 124 John St., Napanee
PRESENT: Jane Lovell in the Chair, Peter Rustige, Mike Normile, Fran Goring-Koch and Ron Gillespie
ABSENT: Councillor Michael Schenk, Eileen Ronald, Dennis Mills, Raymond Karu, Shirley Boston
OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Beckel, Clerk
CALL TO ORDER Jane Lovell, Chair called the meeting to order. There was no quorum present. ADOPTION OF AGENDA COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Normile & Gillespie That the agenda of the Municipal Heritage Committee dated October 1, 2015 be hereby adopted. ADOPTION OF MINUTES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Gillespie & Normile That the minutes of the Municipal Heritage Committee meeting dated September 17, 2015, when no quorum was present, are hereby confirmed and approved, as amended, to add Deb Simpson under Others Present. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION (i) HERITAGE DESIGNATIONS Designation By-laws Research Update Susan Beckel will send out the wording from the designation heritage plaques to the committee; update the Designated Properties Register and post the revised register on the Town’s web site and circulate it to the committee. Peter Rustige advised that he would research #9 on the Designated Properties Register - The Richelieu Hotel Town of Greater Napanee Property Standards By-law No. 2010-50 and An Example of Property Standards By-law for the Protection of Heritage Properties - Town of Collingwood By-law No. 2010-92 The committee reviewed the Town’s existing Property Standards By-law and an example property standards by-law for the protection of heritage properties from the Town of Collingwood.
Municipal Heritage Committee Meeting - October 1, 2015 Page 3 of 85 Page 1 of 3 MUNICIPAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE - October 1, 2015 Minutes
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Normile & Rustige That a property standards by-law for the protection of heritage properties be drafted based on the by-law from the Town of Collingwood for review at a future meeting.
Listing Sub-committee Update (Gillespie, Lovell, Mills, Rustige and Ronald) Susan Beckel will circulate the list that Dennis Mills compiled of buildings that have an association with Sir John A. MacDonald. Incentive Programs Sub-committee Update (Gillespie, Lovell and Boston) Ron Gillespie provided an update on the sub-committee’s work noting he has collected information from other municipalities regarding their incentive programs and is waiting for information from the City of Peterborough. Jane Lovell is in the process of contacting municipalities to inquire as to how successful their incentive programs have been and the associated costs. It was suggested to include the City of Brockville. HERITAGE AWARENESS AND EDUCATION Update on Heritage Photo Project Fran Goring-Koch provided the committee with an update on the Heritage Photo Project, highlighting the following: . 13 photographers began the project and 12 remain; . Town IT staff will be creating a DropBox by the beginning of November for storage of the photos; . J.J. O’Neill Grade 3 class would like to participate; . 100 digital photos have been received to date . could use the list of buildings/properties created by Dennis Mills and the list of designated buildings/properties for suggestions for photographs . would like to get some media coverage to create awareness of the project Jane Lovell will speak with The Beaver about an article for November 2015. NEW BUSINESS Gibbard’s/McPherson Buildings Tour - October 26, 2015 Jane Lovell had forwarded the proposed date to Deb Simpson, who will be conducting the tour and Ms. Simpson has talked to the property owners. The minimum cost for the horse and wagon ride between tour stops is $300, which it was agreed is too expensive. Ms. Lovell has also asked if two photographers working on the Heritage Photo Project could attend the tour and photograph inside of the homes, but this has not been confirmed to date. Places of Worship Tool Kit Susan Beckel will circulate an electronic copy of the Heritage Places of Worship – A Guide to Conserving Heritage Places of Worship in Ontario Communities to committee members and will include a hard copy in each of the Ontario Heritage Tool Kits in the municipal office. Letter from Ron Gillespie to Designated Property owners The committee thanked Mr. Gillespie for drafting the letter. Jane Lovell will review it.
Municipal Heritage Committee Meeting - October 1, 2015 Page 4 of 85 Page 2 of 3 MUNICIPAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE - October 1, 2015 Minutes
NEXT MEETING Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Normile & Rustige That the committee does hereby adjourn at 5:10 p.m.
Jane Lovell, Chair
Municipal Heritage Committee Meeting - October 1, 2015 Page 5 of 85 Page 3 of 3
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Authority:
Approval
Date Town
Original
Prepared Part 88
Licence County
PEfl Licensee: Geographic of
Stage
the
Dundas
Lot
1
No:
of Gibbards
by:
Archaeological
of
Greater
Report
23,
Lennox
Street
Township
Concession
Michael
Michael
County
P236
P246-0203-2014
15-December-2014
Furniture
Napanee,
East,
and
abacusarclmervices(Wgrnail.corn
www.abacusarchaeology.ca
of
Berry,
Berry,
of
Addington
Assessment
Lennox
2
Richmond
(613)530-7944
Plant,
Archaeological
PhD
PhD
and
PkC’
Addington
County,
Services
f
County,
Ontario Ontario Page 6 of 85 Executive Summary
In November of 2014 Abacus Archaeological Services was retained to undertake a Stage I archaeoloaical assessment of the former Gibbards Furniture Plan Property, 88 Dundas Street East, an approximately 1.75 ha parcel of land located within Part of Lot 23, Concession 2, Geographic Township of Richmond, Town of Greater Napanee (Map 4). The property at 88 Dundas Street East is legally described as Part of Lots 1,2,6, and 9 of the South Side of Dundas Street, all of Lots 3,4,5,6 and 7 South Side of Dundas Street, Part of the unnumbered Lot lying between Lots 6 and 9, Part of the unnamed Street lying between Lots 5 and 6 Mill Reserve, Registered Plan Number 82, Town of Greater Napanee, County of Lennox and Addington. The property contains the now closed Gibbards Furniture Shops Ltd. factory, a series of structures located on the west bank of the Napanee River. The owner of the property plans to develop for the construction of a mixed residential and business park use with approximately 5 buildings and related park space (Map 4, see also attached development plan). An archaeological assessment was a condition of pre-consultation applications for a Site Plan Control and Zoning By-Law Amendment.
One registered archaeological site is found within one kilometre of the subject property which is located on the west shore of the Napanee River, a primary watersource. The subject property was part of the original development of the Town of Napanee. The subject property was developed as a Mill Reserve as early as the I790s and has contained industrial structures into the present time. Due to the periods of fire which razed the lands and successive rebuilding episodes the land has been subject to extensive sub surface disturbance. The latter development reworked the property into its present form featuring successive additions and alteration to the natural shoreline of the Napanee River. The 20th century use of these structures has been commerciaL’industrial.
The modern development and use of the property through the construction of structures and related services has resulted in extensive and deep land alterations. This activity will have severely damaged the integrity of any archaeological resources resulting in the disturbance and removal of archaeological potential. Based upon these results the licensee makes the following recommendations with regard to the study area (Image 18).
The subject property has been assessed and determined to contain a low potential for significant archaeological resources. No further work is required within the study area. The property should be considered clear of archaeological concern.
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 7 of 85 4.
Table of Contents
Project Personnel iii Acknowledgments iii 1.0 Project Context I 1.1 Development Context 1
1.2 Historical Context 2 1.3 Property and Structural History 3
2.0 Project Context: Archaeological Context 8 2.1 Previous Archaeological Research near the Subject Propert3 8
2.2 Physiography of the Study Mew 9 2.3 Archaeological Potential of the Study Mew 10
2.4 Inventory of Documentan’ Record Generated in the Field 11
3.0 Analysis and Conclusions 12 4.0 Recommendations 12 5.0 Advice on Compliance with Legislation 13 6.0 Bibliography and Sources 14 Images 16 Maps 20
II Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 8 of 85 Images Image l.A view of the street frontage of the Gibbards Furniture factory 16 Image 2. A view north of a now open area with lumber shed at right 16 Image 3. A view of the former canal entry point at the Napanee River mill pond 17 Image 4. A view south of the filled shoreline of the Napanee River 17 Image 5. A view along the rear of the factory 18 Image 6. A view of the modem factory buildings with graded slope in foreground 18 Image 7. The location, number and direction of photographs 19
Ma PS Map 1. The subject property location on 1:250 000 NTS plan 20 Map 2. The subject property location on 1:50000 NTS plan 21 Map 3. The subject property’location on 1:10 000 Ontario Base Map 22 Map 4. A survey plan of the subject property 23 Map 5. A section from an 1831 map of the Napanee 24 Map 6. A section from an 1859 map of the Napanee 25 Map 7. A section from Walling’s 1860 map of Lennox and Addington 26 Map 8. A section from Brosius’ 1874 Birds-eye-view map 27 Map 9. A section from Meacham’s 1878 map of Lennox and Addington County 28 Map 10. An inset illustration from Meacham’s 1878 County atlas of Lennox 29 Map 11. A photograph of the Gibbards Furniture factory c. 1892 30 Map 12. A view of the Gibbards Furniture factory c. 1912 31 Map 13. A section from the 1904 Fire Insurance Plan of Napanee 32 Map 14. A section from the 1931 Fire Insurance Plan of Napanee 33 Map 15. An aerial view of the subject property in 1973 34 Map 16. A present aerial view of the subject property 35 Map 17. A section of the soil survey plan of Frontenac County 36 Map 18. A plan of the archaeological potential within the subject property 37
Project Personnel
Project Manager/Licence Holder Michael Berry, PhD Licence No. P246
Field Director Michael Berry Historical Research/Report Writing Michael Berry
Acknowledgments
Thanks to the staff of the Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives for the aid in providing and assembling background information on the Gibbards Furniture Company and grounds.
111 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 9 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
project
was
This Archaeologists.
relevant
established. the
activities
Services. property
the time Napanee,
Ministry The Amendment.
during
condition
space the
mixed The
Part
the
Gibbards between
Concession
Street In
1
1.1 1.0
archaeological
November
terms
presence
Napanee
South
Development
Project
granted
study
property
of
report
a
(Map
East,
property
residential
light
will
the
maps.
and Lots
of
carried
of
Furniture
of
County
Background
Side
area
unnumbered
was
be
Tourism,
4,
an
and
2,
the
by
Context
pre-consultation
or
River.
its
at
5
of
The
see
archived
Geographic
approximately
was of
the
absence
inspection
and
written
Ontario
periphery’
88
Permission
weather
2014
out
assessment
Dundas
and
of
also
Context:
legislation
property
Dundas
visited
Shops
6
The
Lennox
during
Culture
Mill
business
Abacus
research
attached
and
by
of
Lot
Heritage
owner
conditions
Street,
via
Ltd.
took
any
Reserve,
the
by Township
Street
assembled
to
the
owner.
lying
of
and
applications
and
triggering
a
the
1.75
access
Archaeological
licensee
features
park factory,
the
place.
Stage
systematic
of
utilized
development
Addington.
all
Sport)
licensee,
East
Act
between
the
ha
former
which
Registered
use
All
of
the
of
and parcel
I
property
The
is
by
Lots
until
a
of
assessment
Land
the
images
with
Richmond,
2011
subject
legally
series
Michael
the
archaeological
for
Gibbards
permitted
coverage.
Lots
Michael
property
assessment
1
3,
such
of
approximately
plan).
The
Registry’
a
Ministry’
Standards
Services
4,
plans
Site
of Plan
land
and
6
described
property
5,
time
and
property
structures
Berry,
were
6
Town
Plan
Berry,
documents
inspection
Furniture
located
An
Number
good
to
and
Coverage
9,
Records,
that
of
was
is
develop
archaeological
Part
completed
and
Control
potential
PhD
Tourism
the 7
and
of
visibility
as
on
a contains
South
retained
within
5
located
suitable
Greater
of
Guidelines
82,
Part
Planning
December
to
buildings
Plan
of
included
generated
was
the
for
local
carry
Town
and
Abacus
of
Side
and
and
Part
Property,
unnamed
the
in
of
the
on
sufficient
to
Lots
Napanee
repository
Zoning
histories
out
accordance
land
was
Act.
Culture’s
of
undertake
assessment construction
the
of
now
of and
Page 10 of 85
for
the
8,
Archaeological
during
Dundas
1,2,8,
the
Greater
Lot
west
2014
performed
features.
entire
related
consultant
closed
88
By-Law
Street
assessment
to
(Map
23,
and
is
bank
Dundas
at
this
(now
identi1’
and
a
Street,
with
was
which
Stage
park
lying
of
4).
All
9
of
a
of a 1.2 Historical Context:
The subject property is located within the town of Napanee, within the geographic Township of Richmond, Lennox and Addington County. Systematic settlement of the township started during the late 1700’s.The first land grants were made to Loyalists and disbanded troops following the end of the American Revolutionary War, with many of the first patents starting in the 1790’s. In 1786 Robert Clark, a milLwright from Dutchess County New York, constructed a saw and grist mill for the Loyalist settlers to the area. The mill was leased by Scottish immigrant Allan Macpherson c. 1812.
In 1832 the first survey of Napanee Town plot was made by Samuel M. Benson of Belleville covering an area from East Street to West Street and from the Napanee River banks to Thomas Street. The town grew slowly but was encouraged on by the Napanee River as a source of power for mills. In 1832 Napanee became a police village in the Township of Richmond with three local trustees. Napanee became an incorporated village in 1854. In the 1850’s the Grand Trunk Railway was built between Montreal and Toronto connecting Napanee businesses and residents to markets and materials from around the world when the season didn’t permit water transport. A large bridge was built over the Napanee River in order to accommodate the new raiiway line which first sent trains passed the town on October 27, 1856. Napanee’s first town hail was also built in 1856.
In 1863, the County of Lennox and Addington separated from the County of Frontenac, and moved the county seat for Lennox and Addington to the Town of Napanee. Sir Richard Cartwright donated land for the new Lennox and Addington County Court House and jail. John Gibbard was among the first town council members in 1865.
7 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 11 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
the
industrial agricultural with
By The the no
although Green the In
Gibbard
Furniture industrial doors, John
wheelwright,
and cabinetmaker A
establishment In Oswego, in
The
Reserve settled the Lot
Richard the Lots
By The
the
Concession
1871
Geographic
1.3
canal
1835.
1874
1860
insurance
the
Gibbard’s company
number
area
Crown
lands
1831
Property
23,
was
subject
first
subject
the
1-9,
Cartwright
the
&
coffins
in
1870’s
concession
John
another
was
joined
along
partial
Caitvright;
canal
burned
the
gristmill
company
the
Son
New
Gibbard
Napanee
previous Mill
Factory’
activities
activity.
on
and
works,
property,
of
property
Township
cut
Mill
footbridge
coverage
officially
Gibbard
Furniture
storehouse,
plan and
and
and
May
Resen’e,
the
the
(Map
the
York
Richmond
the
aid
intensity
to
large
through
(Map
Reserve
Mill
at
whole
was
on
assisted
west
a
Structural
the
to
decided
and
after
of firm
foundry
In
(Map
17,
2
small
number
(LACMA).
7).
the
is
the
that
which
fire
insurance.
1864
took
ground.
originally
or 6).
Reserve
ofRichinond
became
not
Registered
1802
Factory
shore
located
appears
as
famously
mill
John
of the
west
of
other
9).
machine
time
Township
destroyed
number
contained
The
in
a
further
to
a
the
the
and
buildings
extends
property
partner.
to
These
18,
was
lease
the
of
Gibbard
devote
side
History:
(OLR).
property
John source Gibbard
By
Gibbard’s the
within
property
(denoted
machine
to
the
Map
construction
Gibbard
from
The
later
missing
of
south
be shop,
P/at,
from of
Hon.
1868
buildings
Napanee
the
(Map
north T.
a
entirely
furniture
At
the
incorrectly in
8.
located
1874
of
pot lands
Camden
operated
originally
Early
Gibbard
plant
Furniture
No.
William
contained
where
1846
John
plaster Richard
contained
the
number
shop
Napanee
aid.
began
factory
ashery,
a
of
3).
birds-eye-view
3
originally
steamer
82
encouragement
River
the
in
are
to
but
within
which
Gibbard of
At
(denoted
The
pieces.
later
Township,
by
mill
the
the
and
work
several
focused
also
foot
Bartels
this CartwTight,
located
was
suffered
17,
Shops
gristmill,
River
a
Alan
200
a
was
development
construction
plans
dense
Son.
and
fed
boat
the
blacksmith,
Map
time
bridge,
detailed
quickly
in
At
was
surveyed
acre
number
set
noted
a MacPherson
Mill
Napanee was
was
sawmill
for
between
upon
out
the
large
indicate
the
8), John
number
born
drawing
able
aside
lot
of
a
store
who
established built
contained
Reserve
time
of
in
mill
rebuilt
first
in
local
William
the
was
flouring
Gibbards
near
to
Deseronto
addition
as
16,
and
the
carriage
as
of
and
the
and
had
as
in
rebuild
of
construction
(see
located
of
of
Lot
the
the
homes
Map of
formally
1878
a
Wilton,
sale
August
on
Gibbard’s
three
was
c.
Herring
structures
property
saw
took
Napanee
carpenter
23
Map
Mill
town
John
T. 1812
Page 12 of 85
a
mill
by
to
8),
of
manufacturers,
clearly
County
larger son,
despite
in
Gibbard on
mill
headed
and
major
possession
the
JoIm
furniture
as
Reserve.
the
13).
Herring’s
owned
and
1792
of granted
(LACMA).
the
plant
William
well
(Map
mills.
(Map
Gibbard’s
of
Napanee
and
details
second
and
scale
had
Mill
Gibbard
a
fires
The
having
map,
sash,
by
for
hub
in
and
as
by
8).
by
5).
and
of
I. of John Herring plant was destroyed by fire in 1895 and remained burnt out ruins until after 1916 (LACMA). Ac. 1912 photograph of the property details the wooded footbridge and the partially removed remains of the Herring plant situated besides the Gibbard’s furniture factory building (Map 12). Note the proximity of the Napanee River shoreline at this point in time as the factory structures are set directly on the river bank, later during the 2O century the shoreline is filled in and the banks were set upon a steeper grade.
In 1892 the Gibbard factory experienced the last of the major fires which destroyed the property. Following the last fire episode the Gibbard furniture factory was rebuilt with modern features. The furniture showrooms along with storage areas and livery were located along the Dundas Street road frontage with the construction factory remaining south of the canal. By 1931 the showrooms and various factory buildings were connected, the canal routed beneath the building, with kilns and a large lumber shed build within the grounds which remains intact today (Map 14, compare with Image 2 which depicts the lumber shed at present).
Although containing a number of industrial buildings during the I9 century the Mill Reserve remained legally owned by members of the Camwight family. The land was owned by Hon. Sir Richard John CartwTight and his wife during the 19th century and then Dame Francis Jane Cattvright until 1911 when Richard Conway Carhvright became the last sole owner of the land. Richard Conway Cartxwight began to parcel off and sell portions of the Mill Reserve during the early 20th century. The land consisted of eleven lots and was separated by the canal which cut the land through the middle from east to west. Lots 3 to 8 were sold directly from Richard C. Cartwright to the Gibbard Furniture Company of Napanee Ltd. in 1915 (LACMA). Lot 2 was sold by Richard Cartwright to Catherine Rebecca Chatterson in 1918, Chatterson sold to George Gibbard in 1937 however the Gibbard’s sold to Alfred Lucas in 1938. By 1948 Lot 2 was purchased by Nellis Pdngle, who also bought Lot I and its unnumbered extension to the east in 1969. Pringles’s Service Ltd. operated at that location until 1979 when Lots 1,2 and the unnumbered extension were sold to Gibbard Furniture Shops Ltd. From 1979 Gibbard’s owned the whole of the Mill Reserve south of Dundas Street and north of the Napanee Ri‘er.
Lots I to 11 south of the canal were retained as Crown land until 1920 when the province sold the land to the Napanee municipality (LACMA). The Town of Napanee in turn sold the land to Jack McPherson in January 1941, who sold it to the Gibbard Furniture Shops Ltd. Four successive generations of Gibbard family members had maintained control of the company however in 1940 Gibbard’s Furniture was sold to Jack McPherson; McPherson had been a sales manager of tile company during the 1920s. Following the sale Jack McPherson began an extensive rebuilding and re-equipping program of the factory and grounds. The company continued to produce quality goods during the second half of the 19(11century however facing a slow decline the Gibbard Furniture Shops Ltd. closed its doors in 2009.
4 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 13 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
canal
the Map
The weight (Image directing
east same industrial
the land eastwards) advertisements which
territories they hunters The completely
bone the appears typical lifeway
harvesting rare
extinction
appears amalgamation 1.4
found
copper the
Ottawa landscape in fall/winter
16).
order
general
facility
spring, Archaeology
goods
Paleo-lndian
as
but
Archaic
between
could
and
can
advert
which
on
dates
the
of
of
and
1,
River
likely
can
not
on
similar
to
aerial
water
Archaic
survive.
site
the located
the
made where
to
of
Champlain
hunt
dispersal
of
catch
begins
is
family
sites
conditions
developed
shell
be
unknown
to
is had
Period
individual
the
the
wild
glacier
the
Late-Paleo
which
systems.
moved
visible
of
c.
superficially
photography
for
beneath
to
caribou
by
east
previous
megafauna moose
spawning
objects
Dundas
the
ice 1850.
of
Period
beneath
sites
groups
the
during
foods
On
ifineral
natives
begins
the
of
contains
covered
of
regional the
into
historic
in
between
Sea
occasion
and
of
the
are
By
the
hunting
the
An
hunting
and
Region:
Eastern
appear. shallows
in
such
Period.
the
the
Street
coalesce
fed
the
“Canada’s”).
(Muller
surrounded
ftimishin
the population
of
were
fish.
around
Rouge
Eastern
existing
1892
described
megafauna
and
sources
recent
Belleville
Algonquin
stone,
at
water
area
people
way
as
Late
the
tools
showroom
territories
least
In
was
of
Ontario
the
hickory
photograph
of
River
after
5’
the
into and
7000
of
biodegradable
Archaic,
Ontario
Holocene
power
though
buildings
switch
from
Lake
important
around
or
(Map 19
life
and
into
as
by
late
Prest
large
phase
a
such
fragments
additions
BP At
about
Highlands
and
nuts.
alternating
of
steppe
paved
sixth
where
1973
Iroquois
small
to
fall,
building
to
the
in
11);
(here
in
the
5
cemeteries
locations
encampments 1985).
are as
the
of
of
a
(LACMA).
a
good
Eastern
5000
For
present
(Wright,
family
windows
boreal
show
way mastodons.
Cree
the
despite
and
Lake
environment
usually
family
mills
they
defined
materials
(Map
of
the
became
and
c.
soil
and
between
Later
gravel
BP,
of
copper
and
the
trap
Iroquois
1850
for
groups
lifeway
was
Ontario
most
period
life
units,
Lake a
and
conditions
related
15).
1972).
the
particularly
of
heavily
Ojibwa
modem
as
harvesting
as
The
and
closed
around
focused surfaces
a
showroom
the
so
burial
part random the
As
are
the
spring/summer Between
fertile
Iroquois
had
disperse
to
the
became
the
hunt
(12,000
and oldest
main
rear
the
Trent
Paleo-lndian
also
winter
land
the
developed
of
area
coat
been
in
majority
goods,
rapids
bone
is
climate
on
locally.
plain.
northern
and factory
Archaic
with
find
along
spawning
structure
found.
rebounded
marked remaining
Valley
was
is
across
of
established.
contains
fishing
1964
established
BP)
in
structures tools
Page 14 of 85
abandoned
of
red
and
particularly
culverts
large
Small
exposed
the
of
moderated
portion
when
a
modem
and
The
Copper
way
paint
Ontario.
and
sites
the
by
spear
waterfalls
and
the
and
today
Trent
fish;
hunting
painted
part
bands
from
the
1973
bulk
the
artifacts
of
refuse
the are
(Map
the
and
This
point
as
the
but
life
and
of
of
the
In
the
far
to of The beginning of the Woodland period is marked by the appearance of pottery on First Nation’s sites. The Early Woodland people of Ontario were the first to use pottery in this province. In many other respects, people of the Early Woodland Period continued to live in much the same way as their predecessors of the Late Archaic. In Eastern Ontario this occurred around 3000 BP a time when the Meadowood Culture of Western New York State begins to occupy the province.
Shortly after 2300 BP the Middle Woodland Period begins with a steady increase in the population of Ontario. Long distance trade is evident from the appearance of exotic materials such as marine shell, mica and copper. Evidence from archaeological sites indicates that by the Middle Woodland Period the people of Ontario began to identitS’ with specific regions of the province. For the first time this allows archaeologists to distinguish regional cultural traditions - sets of characteristics which are unique to a part of the province. Archaeologists have named these cultural traditions Laurel (northern Ontario), Point Peninsula (eastern and south-central Ontario), Saugeen (southwestern Ontario) and Couture (extreme southwestern Ontario).
The range of sites and archaeological evidence collected thus far have provided a picture of the seasonal patterns of activity that Middle Woodland people used to exploit the wide variety of resources in their territories. The spring, summer and fall saw macrobands, larger groups of people congregatinQat lakeshore sites to fish, collect shellfish and hunt in the surrounding forests. The approaching close of the summer season resulted in an emphasis on collection and storage of hunted resources, due to the need to store up large quantities of food for the winter. By late fall and early winter, the community would split into microbands, small family hunting groups, each relocating to a smaller ‘family hunting area inland where they would stay until the process repeated and larger macrobands rejoined in the spring.
By the Late Woodland Period, c. 800 AD, a definitively Iroquoian people were occupying the north shore of Lake Ontario. The period is most clearly distinguished by the changes in pottery construction and decoration. By the beginning of the Late Woodland (ie. by A.D. 900) period the coil method with various stamped decorations (dentate, rocker, pseudo scallop shell) was abandoned in favour of the paddle and anvil method, with vessels decorated with ‘cord-wrapped stick’decoration. Intensive horticulture is practiced in this period as maize (corn) was introduced sometime after 500 AD, providing a large reserve of corn. Beans, squash and sunflowers are also grown. Villages of longhouses with many hundreds of people begin to be seen particularly in Prince Edward County and on the sandy ridges along the north shore of Lake Ontario. The area appears to have been largely abandoned around 1550 AD possibly due to conflict between the Iroquois of New York State and the Huron Confederacy.
In the Kingston region most archaeological sites are known from the north shore of Lake Ontario and the islands to the south, the mouth of the Cataraqui River, the Napanee River and Wilton Creek environs and the shore of the St. Lawrence east of Kingston along with the Thousand Islands. Many of the registered sites in this region around Kingston and up
6 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 15 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
observed
lakes Blomely
Frontenac Mountains. Axis. the
Thousand
Shield
It
Woodland
Historic Period
Middle
Early Archaic Paleo-Indian
Late Late Middle
Late Early
Early
would
Cataraqui/Rideau
in
The
that
this
appear
and
pattern
Frontenac
Islands
Axis
runs
Sites
area
subsequently
Narrow
Mississauga Glacial
Euro-Canadian Pickering Broad Laurentian Corner Hi-Lo
Huron Middlesex Early Side Fluted
Middleport Sandbanks Meadowood
Point Small Bifurcate Group
and
that
southeast
is
and
on
before
likely
Notched
not
the
the
Peninsula
Middle
Axis
Point
Point at
-
Point
Waterway
Notched
Kame
Point
St.
portage
a
Base Frontenac
majority’ it
-
Lawrence
full
due
crossing
is
Princess
registered
enters
Archaic
a
picture
to
continuation
points
a
were
of
Up
Point
lack
Iroquois
Axis
the
the
of
State
by
first
along
St.
of
sites
past
are
Hugh
archaeological
Lawrence
documented
New
of
4000-
600 2400 4500-
300 2900- ca. generally
225 2300- 5500 Time
8000 9700
670 3500- 8900-
1100-
11000-
1 10000-
10400-950081’
7
settlement
the
500
in
the
3000
Daechsel - the -
- - York - - -
- -
350 connecting
Present 600
Present
Range
4000
3000 5500
2000
2400 3000
700 3500 8900
8000
1200 exposed
1300
9700
10400
area
BP
BP
BP
River
BP
resfticted
and
HP
BP HP
HP BP
HP BP 81’ BP
81’
BP
BP
patterns. by
are
BP
(Daechsel,
survey
rises
granites
avocational
and
located
rivers.
abandonment transition
tribal
horticulture
European settlements small
Iroguoian burial stone transition big
southward agriculture elaborate orientation polished nomadic
long introduction river Comment
thus
to
as
work
game distance
-
the
the
tools,
organization,
nomadic
ceremonialism
However,
of
lakeshore
south
forming 1988,
-
hunters
burials
hunters
to
to
the
shores
over Adirondack
Settlement
territory
wound
migration
archaeologist
begins
large
defended
territorial of
Page 16 of 85
trade,
of
Canadian
groups
1989).
poflerv
most
and
the
village
the
of
this
warfare
burial
into
gatherers
the
Frontenac
villages,
of
sites
the
many
mounds Guy 2.0 Project Context: Archaeological Context
2.1 Previous Archaeological Research near the Subject Property:
No archaeological study has been previously performed within the study area. Consultation with the Ministry of Culture’s Archaeological Sites Database shows that
one registered site is located within 1 km of the study area, which is located within Borden Block BbGf’.
An archaeological assessment and monitoring project was undertaken at the court house and gaol property in 1993 by Heritage Quest Inc. (Daechsel, 1993). This work involved the excavation of shovel test pits within the 30 mx 10 m area proposed for the construction development of an addition to the rear of the court house. The Stage 2 assessment recovered a buried cultural layer with historic period nineteenth- and twentieth-century artifacts. During construction phase monitoring for the addition’s foundation a well was discovered located 10.3 metres north of the portico on the court house’s north façade. As a result of this assessment, the buried cultural surface and the adjoining well were registered as the Napanee-County Court House site (BbGf-40). The Napanee-County Court House site (BbGf-40) is located approximately 300 m north of the subject property. No other sites have been registered within a one kilometre radius of the property.
‘Information courtesy of Robert Von Bitter, Archaeological Data Coordinator, OntarioMinistryof Culture.
8 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 17 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
juniper
region. The
balsam Common
Napanee birch, 2.2
parent the
Town (Tis)
that Ontario stripped soils
hay, The The
months
commercial holding
developed subsoil.
the
often upon commonly
Roblindale
Sidney
1963:39).
region,
Physiography
soil,
exist
subject
subject
Sidney
grass
covering
which
the
resulting
red
of
materials
It
(Gillespie
soils. fir
of
sub-region
capacity;
away
resulting
Napanee
Due
River.
seasonal
in
is
trees
maple,
are
and the
The
in
bordering
deep
Station
characterized
property
property
soils
is this
fertilizers.
lacustrine
to
also
year.
by
the
surrounded
legume
to
in
surface
their
region
and
with
The
are
and
glacial
the
a
making
in
et
sedimentary
(Map
rainfall
of
found
in
of
failed
poorly al.,
Agricultural
deposited
poorly
is
consists
subject
region
sandy
on
red, the
subsoil
Richmond
the
mixtures,
soils
include
located
clay
1962:28).
the
17).
action
in
Study
crop.
by
Great
agricultural white
by
and
drained
nature
the
drained
Dummer
of
include
sediments
property
flat
clays a
The
of
ability’
limestone
by
Tioga
larger
in
sugar
resulting
sub-region
Lakes-St.
However,
and
Area:
a
and Township
to
use
the
the
Tioga
thin
Deeper
these
almost
undulating
land
clay
elm,
bur
to
of
Napanee
maple,
to
are
block
Moraines.
flow
is
use
strip
of
use
Sidney
create
located
oaks.
soils
that
soils
in
soils
bedrock.
sandy
eastern
glacial
difficult
Lawrence
glacial
hay completely
(Rowe,
of
thin
(Gillespie
as
of
of
9
beech,
is
the
are
are
extending
pasture
Eastern
land
proper Sidney
production
topography
Limestone
commonly
Clay
loam
soils
in
The
cedar,
Lake
river
very’
well
till
an
unless
1977:93).
Much
located
basswood,
Forest
occurs
land general
(Chapman
with
area
drainage;
Clay
and
lands.
blocking
hemlock,
drained
well
(Gillespie
Iroquois.
dwarfjuniper
from
improved of
is
Plain
is
Wicklund, loose
of
water
with
on
(Sc)
draining
Region.
towards
limited
the
known
All
area
Tioga
the
the
sandy
white
water
excessive
Lowlands
shallow
soil
that
eastern and
single
crop
saturated
The
and
Napanee
lies
west
Series
by
to
to
overburden
and
Putnam,
incorporates
Examples
the
soils
and
Wicklund,
production
Sidney
1963:31).
movement
within
and
be
the
grained
manure
bank
white
clay northern
Page 18 of 85
have
red
good
spring
production
creeping
physiogtaphic
formed
sandy
for
River
of
the
soils
and
ash,
1984:186).
a
many
pine,
sand
within and
of
the
They
low-
was
Huron-
rains
loam
through
depends
loam
north part
the
yellow
trees
of
are
and
sand
are
of
of
the to 2.3 Archaeological Potential of the Study Area:
The archaeological potential of the study area is primarily dictated by the proximity to significant physiographic features and previous occupation of the subject property. Historical research has shown that the area in question was located within the original town settlement of Napanee. A mill structure was built on the lot c. 1792. The subject property contained industrial structures from the 1790’s onward with greater development appearing by the 1830’s. The subject property represents the industrial development centre which grew up in the urban core areas adjacent to the river within Napanee. One registered archaeological site is found within 1 kilometre of the subject property. The property is located upon the Napanee River (Maps 3). The property falls within a zone of potential for the presence of precontact or early contact period aboriginal sites, given the proximity to water sources within the area.
Despite the historical and pre-contact potential of the property the modem development and use of the property has resulted in extensive and deep land alterations which have severely damaged the integrity of archaeological resources, resulting in the disturbance and removal of archaeological potential in the property. The shoreline area adjacent to 20th the subject property was subjected to filling and stabilization during the century, altering the slope and nature of the shoreline. Following the burning and later removal of several phases of industrial buildings within the property the area was rebuilt with modem facilities constructed during the mid-20” century including a significant redesign of the landscape. The present property features stepped landscaping within the southern part (Image 6). No part of the property remains undeveloped; a factor which indicates removal of potential.
The study area was visited by the licensee, Michael Berry, on December 8, 2014 at which time a property inspection took place. The property inspection covered the entire exterior area of the property via a systematic coverage walking in 5m intervals during light and weather conditions which permitted good visibility of land features. Coverage was sufficient to identify the presence or absence of any features of archaeological potential. The inspection took place
The dense placement of existing building footprints, infrastructure development and mechanical excavation within the area of the existing structures has removed potential throughout the property (see Images 1-6). It is not expected that any sites could have survived the historical development activities, and construction of services that have removed or heavily altered all elements of the original topography in the subject property. It is clearly demonstrated through background research and property inspection that there has been complete and intensive disturbance of the developed area.
10 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 19 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Photographs
2.4
2460203D03
2460203D06 2460203D02
2460203D08 2460203D05 2460203D01
2460203D14 2460203D1 2460203D07 2460203D04
2460203D 2460203D13 2460203Db
2460203D20 2460203D16 2460203D12 2460203D09
2460203D22 2460203D 2460203D1
2460203D25 2460203D2 2460203D Photo
2460203D24
2460203D26 2460203
Inventory
#
D23
IS
17
19
5
I
I
View Description
View View View
View View View View
View View View View
View View View
View View View’ View
View View View
View View View
View
of
Documentary
of of
of of of
of of of
of of of of
of of of
of of of of
of of of
of of of
of
the the
the
the
the
the the the
the the
the the the the
the the
the the the
the the the
the the the
the
gravel
gravel
rear shoreline rear facton’
rear shoreline rear
rear shoreline factory
rear rear rear former
rear rear
rear former factory
rear rear
Lot
Lot
Lot
I of
I of
of of
of of of
of of of
I of
of
of
structure
structure
structure
loading
loading
the
the
the the the
the the the
the the the
the the
canal
canal
road
road
road
and
and
and
Record
factory
factory
factory factory factory
factory
factory factory
factory
factory factory
factory factory
frontage
frontage
frontage
entrance
entrance
falls
falls
falls
area
area
and
and
and
and
Generated
loading
loading
11
lumber
lumber
bay
bay
shed
shed
in
the
Direction
Field
XV
XV
XV XV
W N
N
XV N
N
N N
N N N
N
N E
S
S
E
S S
S
S S
Page 20 of 85
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-I 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-I 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14 08-Dec-14
08-Dec-14
Date
4 4 3.0 Analysis and Conclusions
In November of 2014 Abacus Archaeological Services was retained to undertake a Stage archaeological assessment of the former Gibbards Furniture Plan Property, 88 Dundas Street East, an approximately 1.75 ha parcel of land located within Part of Lot 23, Concession 2, Geographic Township of Richmond, Town of Greater Napanee (Map 4). The property at 88 Dundas Street East is legally described as Part of Lots 1, 2, 8, and 9 of the South Side of Dundas Street, all of Lots 3,4,5,6 and 7 South Side of Dundas Street, Part of the unnumbered Lot lying between Lots 6 and 9, Part of the unnamed Street lying between Lots 5 and 6 Mill Reserve, Registered Plan Number 82, Town of Greater Napanee, County of Lennox and Addington. The property contains the now closed Gibbards Furniture Shops Ltd. factory, a series of structures located on the west bank of the Napanee River. The owner of the property plans to develop for the construction of a mixed residential and business park use with approximately 5 buildings and related park space (Map 4, see also attached development plan). An archaeological assessment was a condition of pre-consultation applications for a Site Plan Control and Zoning By-Law Amendment.
One registered archaeological site is found within one kilometre of the subject property which is located on the west shore of the Napanee River, a primary watersource. The subject property was part of the original development of the Town of Napanee. The subject property was developed as a Mill Reserve as early as the 1790s and has contained industrial structures into the present time. Due to the periods of fire which razed the lands and successive rebuilding episodes the land has been subject to extensive sub surface disturbance. The latter development reworked the property into its present form featuring successive additions and alteration to the natural shoreline of the Napanee River. The 20th century use of these structures has been commercial/industrial.
The modern development and use of the property through the construction of structures and related services has resulted in extensive and deep land alterations. This activity will have severely damaged the integrity of any archaeological resources resulting in the disturbance and removal of archaeological potential.
4.0 Recommendations
Based upon these results the licensee makes the following recommendations with regard to the study area (Image 18).
The subject property has been assessed and determined to contain a low potential for significant archaeological resources. No further work is required within the study area. The property should be considered clear of archaeological concern.
12 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 21 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Act,
recommendations
Act.
Act. development. heritage
value than
until Tourism are This
Archaeology remove area The
new licensing 5.0
The out Should site, It ffirther
Cemeteries alteration
discovering
is
issued
Advice
archaeological
an
report
d.
2002,
Cemeteries
The
submitted
archaeological
of
a
report
such
or
licensed
concerns
offence
a
previously
any
interest, of
proponent
and
development
in
of
time
by
S.O.
is
Ontario.
is
on
at
accordance
human
artifact
the
reviewed
Culture,
Reports
the
submitted
the
Compliance
a
archaeologist
under
as
2002,
Act,
site
with
report
Minister,
and
Ministry
a
ensure
undocumented
fieldwork,
remains
or
licensed
or
site
Wien
immediately
R.S.O.
the
regard
Sections
referred
a
c.33
person
proposal
other
to
to
letter
with
and
to
report
the
ensure
the
all
the
(when
and
of
must
therefore with
physical
1990
archaeologist
to
Part
conservation,
to
will
Minister
discovering
Consumer
in matters
to
Minister
48
that
alterations
has
have
make
compliance
that
in
VI
and
noti& Legislation
proclaimed
c.
be
and
archaeological
the
Section
been
C.4
of
issued
been it
evidence
relating
engage
any
subject
69
stating
complies
archaeological
the
of
the
and
Services.
filed
of
the
alteration
Tourism
to
has
addressed
protection
Ontario
65.1
by
police
13
the
with
the
archaeological
a
to
in
archaeological
that
to
in
completed
of
the
licensed
Ontario
Section
Funeral,
force)
of
archaeological
with
the
resources
past
Section
the
ministry
or
the
and
Heritage
to
Ontario
to
coroner
the
and
site
human
fieldwork
require a
Ontario
the
Culture
consultant
Heritage
48
known
Burial archaeological
standards
48
preservation
has
satisfaction
be
(1)
stating
sites
Public
(1)
resources
Act,
use
and
no
discovered,
that
of
Heritage
as
archaeological sites
of
and
and
by
ffirther
Act
or
the
the
R.S.O.
a
that
any
archaeologist
the
and
Register
condition
activity
the
within
report
Cremation
Ontario
Registrar
for
Ontario
must
of
person
there
of
guidelines proposed
Page 22 of 85
cultural
fieldwork
Act.
any
1990,
the
the
they
the
from
cease
of
are
party
cultural
Ministry
Heritage
of
site
Heritage
of
may
c
project
Services
no
to heritage
0.18.
the
that
on
or
other
carry
be
site,
to
the
of a 6.0 Bibliography and Sources
Image and Topographic Map References
1:250, 000 Topographical Map -NTS 31/C 1975 1:50, 000 Topographical Map - NTS 3 1C7 -3 1/C2, 1975 1:10, 000 Ontario Base Map—OBM# 1018375049000- 1018380049000,1992
1973 Federal Series 73-A27415-73. Queen’s University Air Photograph Collection.
Archival Map References
1831 Plan of Napanee. Samuel Benson. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives
1859 Plan of Napanee compiled by A.B. Perry U.C. Surveyor, scale three chains to one inch. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
1860 Map of the United Counties of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington, Canada West, from actual Surveys under the Direction of H. F. Walling. Putnam & Walling Publishers. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
1874 Bird’s Eye View of Napanee. Chicago Lithograph Company. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
1878 Napanee inset map from Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Counties of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington, Ontario, Belleville. J.H. Meacham. Reprinted by Mika Silk Screening Limited. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
1904 Town of Napanee Fire Insurance Plan. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
1931 Town of Napanee Fire Insurance Plan. Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
14 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 23 of 85 Source References
CHAPMAN. L. J. & PUTNAM. D. F. (1984) The Physiography of Southern Ontario. Ontario Geological Survey. Special Vol.2.
DAECHSEL. H. (1988) Frontenac County: Conservation License Report 1987. License 87-21. Report prepared by the Cataraqui Archaeological Research Foundation. On file with the Ontario Ministry of Culture and Communications.
DAECHSEL, H. (1989) Frontenac and Leeds-Grenville Conservation License Report 1988. Licence 88-19.Report prepared by the Cataraqui Archaeological Research Foundation. On file with the Ontario Ministry of Culture and Communications.
DAECHSEL. H. (1993) Archaeological Assessment and Monitoring of County Court House, Lennox and Addington County, Napanee, Ontario. Toronto, Report on file with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.
GILLESPIE. i.E. & WICKLUND. R. E. (1963) Soil Survey of Lennox and Addington County. Ontario Soil Sun’ev. Guelph. Ontario Department of Agriculture.
GILLESPIE. J. E.. WICKLUND. R. E. & MATHEWS. B.C. (1962) Soil Survey of Frontenac County. Ontario Soil Survei’.Guelph. Ontario Department of Agriculture.
LACMA Lennox & Addington County Museum & Archives.
OLR Ontario Land Records Abstract Index.
ROWE. J. S. (1977) Forest Regions of Canada, Ottawa, Canadian Forestry Service and the Department of Fisheries and the Environment.
WRIGHT, I. V. (1972) Ontario Prehistory: an eleven thousand-year archaeological outline, Ottawa. Archaeological Survey of Canada, National Museum of Man.
15
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 24 of 85 Images
Image l.A view of the street frontage of the Gibbards Furniture factory.
Image 2. A view north of a now open area with lumber shed at right.
16 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 25 of 85 Image 3. A view of the former canal entry point at the Napanee River mill pond.
Image 4. A view south of the filled shoreline of the Napanee River.
17
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 26 of 85 ImageS. A view along the rear of the factory with the c. 1850 stone portion visible at right.
Image 6. A view of the modern factory buildings with graded slope in foreground.
18 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 27 of 85 .74
Subject Property Limits I I ii
Location, direction and number of Image photograph
Image 7. The location, number and direction orphotographs within the subject property (Base Plan Google Earth).
19
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 28 of 85 0 n
cd zF-. =C C C In
C C C C C Cl C t Ce C. C 2.
Ce
C U
C.
z C.
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 29 of 85 Map 2. The subject property location on 1:50 000 NTS plan (31C7/31C2).
21
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 30 of 85 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
La
C
tt n
-I 0 •0 a
C n
C
0 C
o = t.) t’J
-I C
C
qt C
Page 31 of 85 Go La -J U, C a ‘S C C
Go PLAN OF SURVEY OF PARTOF LOTS I, 2. 8, AND9 SOCTi! SIDE OF DUND4SSTREET ALL OF LOTS3, 1,5, 6 AM) 7 SOUTHSIDE OF DUNDASSTREET PARTOF THE UNNUMBEREDLOT Lyingbdwnn LOTS6 AND9 PARTOF THE LWNAMEDSTREET Lyinghctrn LOTSSAND 6 MIII, RESERVE.REGISTEREDPL’IN TOIINOF GREITERNAIqNLE COt/STYOF LE VSOSANDADDINGTON /
/ --
/
Map 4. A survey plan of the subject property (Courtesy ol %I.Keene).
23
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 32 of 85 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
p -I
—t 1’ Page 33 of 85
Map 5. A section from an 1831 map of the Napanee with the MIII Resen’e property at centre.
24 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 34 of 85
Map 6. A section from an 1859 map of the Napanee with the subject property outlined in purple.
25 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
OZtfl.sflQ7
tStr%mt\ jiltrn,, a 412 Maip .Vflflrnnq JfCçfl4 w,.,’ ,.Utbbard Cth.:€t it: j4?SOT&4 L ott
f tot flirts s-flute Page 35 of 85 ee
Map 7. A section from WaIling’s 1860 map of Lennox and Addinglon County with subject property outlined in purple.
26 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 36 of 85
MapS. A section from Brosius’ 1874 Birds-eye-view map of Lennox and Addington County with the subject property indicated at centre.
27 Map 9. A section from Meacham’s 1878 map of Lennox and Addington County with subject property outlined in purple.
28 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 37 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Iap
ID.
An
inset
illustration
.1.
Gibbard
from
&
Sons
Nleacham’s
factory
and
1878
29
showroom
County
atlas
structures
of
Lennox
depicted.
and Addinglon
Page 38 of 85
with the Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 39 of 85
31
Map II. A photograph of the Gibbards Furniture factory c. 1892 with John Gibbard at far left (Lennox & Addinglon County Museum & Archives).
30 — — ‘I
-
— — -—‘ cc - cc
U I—
rM= t U I-— U
C— Ii
a U t -Cc
@4 c I.0C
SEU C
@4.
a U —t U
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 40 of 85
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Map
13.
A
section
From
approximate
the
1903,
location
updated
of
to
the
32
1917.
subject
Fire
property
Insurance
outlined.
Plan
of Napance
Page 41 of 85
with the
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
Map
14.
A
section
from
the
1931
Fire
the
subject
Insurance
property
33
Plan
of
outlined.
Napanee
with
the approximate
Page 42 of 85
location of
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ...
?
ti
Map
15.
An
aerial
view
of
the
subject
34
property in
______
1973 (A27415-73). Page 43 of 85 Map 16. A present aerial view of the subject property (Coogle Earth 2014).
35
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 44 of 85 Map 17. A section of the soil survey plan of Frontenac County with the subject property location indicated (Gillespie et al.. 1962).
36 Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 45 of 85 Map 18. A plan of the archaeological potential within the subject property (Courtesy ofM. Keene).
37
Gibbard's Redevelopment - Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment ... Page 46 of 85 20152015Fall / automne
Quarterly Publication of Community Heritage Ontario / Patrimoine communautaire de l'Ontario
Brockville's “Old is New” Railway Station IN THIS ISSUE Doug Grant Brockville’s “Old is New” Railway 1 Station few years ago, VIA Rail Canada VIA Rail, Yves Desjardins-Siciliano, who Elizabethtown-Kitley’s Rambling 3 Aused the Federal Infrastructure presented the conceptual drawing of the Heritage Car Rally Grant Program opportunity to arrange for proposed station. Ontario Heritage Conference 2016 4 millions of dollars in funding to upgrade Reaction in the community to this Jimmy Thompson Memorial Pool 5 and improve its rail lines and buildings news was somewhat mixed. It did not take is Treading Water across the country. VIA and CNCP were long for the concerned citizens of The National Trust Announces 5 to cooperate to build a new railway sta- Brockville to voice their opinions. tion in Brockville, as well as sections of Although a few thought Brockville Award Recipients third rail trackage in the area. Brockville deserved a modern building, the majority Celebrating Heritage Day 2016 5 is part of the Windsor to Montreal and felt that VIA had not considered the his- City of Toronto Official Plan 6 Ottawa daily VIA Rail service. Similar torical atmosphere of our city in the Heritage Amendments announcements were made in many styling of the new building. It was obvious CHO/PCO Board Meetings 6 places in Canada. through the messages I received from Copyright Notice 6 Architectural renderings of the pro- friends and strangers that many people posed Brockville station, to be built 200 were disappointed with what they were Circulate CHOnews 6 feet east of the existing 1872 Union seeing in the rendering. A Tale of Two Parts - Part IVs in 7 CNCP station, were released in a media I was encouraged to make a response Part Vs event in October 2010 and published in to VIA and our elected representatives on Culture Talks 8 Brockville's daily newspaper, The behalf of those concerned that the design CHO/PCO Mission Statement 8 Recorder & Times. There had been no pre- did not represent the flavour of our city. announcement. Mayor David Henderson, As evident in the image, the station looked Disclaimer 8 MP Gord Brown, MPP Steve Clark, a few like a greenhouse with two garages tacked CHOnews Deadlines 8 other officials, and the local media had on each end. Strategic Plan Survey 8 been invited to a quiet media announce- We collected pictures of old and new President’s Message 9 ment ceremony at the railway station. All railway stations that retain some of the were to meet the general council lawyer of traditional styling of railway architecture. Who is your Heritage Hero? 9 We Want to Hear From You 9 Community Heritage Ontario 10 Service Awards 2016 CHO/PCO Board of Directors 11 News from CHO/PCO Board of 11 Directors Advertise in CHOnews 11 Keep the Toronto Island Community 12 Unwelcome Visitor 12
First conceptual drawing of proposed VIA station in Brockville www.communityheritageontario.ca CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 47 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 1 We prepared a report that went to the pub- lic relations officials of VIA in Montreal. They soon replied and started to consider our sentiment. I was given opportunities to make suggestions to VIA public rela- tions people, who told me they would pass on our ideas to those who make the deci- sions. We heard that the architects in Mon- treal had been asked to redesign their pro- posal in light of the public comments. A new design was sent to those who were waiting for a reaction to our position. As the second drawing shows, the roof was changed to slope on all three sections, the glass was reduced, and brick, stone, and Second conceptual drawing of proposed VIA station asphalt shingles were evident. All this was accomplished without changing the floor layout. It was a fair compromise, I thought. We felt that would be the final word and design. Nothing fur- ther happened with the project for many months. In the summer of 2014, after new funding was secured and the plans down- sized by VIA, it was announced at another media event that a new station would no longer be needed. The old station would be used into the future. It would be redesigned on the exterior to replicate the original 1872 design as much as possible. The project was tendered, a contractor chosen, and construction was underway between the fall of 2014 and spring of 2015. The 1872 station in November 2009 At the Official Opening Day, July 23, 2015, the new president and CEO of VIA, Yves Desjardins-Siciliano, and his staff unveiled the refurbished station to the media and a large gathering of local citi- zens.
Doug Grant is a member of Her- itage Brockville.
The 1872 station in February 2015 The 1872 station in July 2015
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 48 of 85 2 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 Elizabethtown-Kitley's Rambling Heritage Car Rally
Tracy Gayda lizabethtown-Kitley is a large and narrow township that Estretches close to seventy kilometers north to south. Being a rural community with small hamlets spread out along its expanse, it makes walking tours a hard project. There are so many unique heritage properties along the back roads; many "locals" are unaware of our gems. Heritage Elizabethtown-Kitley wanted to draw attention to the heritage points that people pass on their daily ride from one end of the township to another. Building on the Elizabethtown-Kitley Cultural Mapping project, the Heritage Committee hosted a Ram- bling Heritage Car Rally. This was held on August 15, 2015, beginning at the Spring Valley Public Library and ending at the Toledo Legion. The money raised went to future Township Her- itage projects. What is a car rally, you ask? It is a scenic tour with a twist. Participants answer questions along a prepared route and the winner is the group with the most correct answers. The heritage car rally illustrated many of the heritage and historical points of interest in Elizabethtown-Kitley, from the St. Lawrence River in the south, back to Toledo in the north. There were "more things heritage" than an afternoon can hold, but the road trip highlighted quite a few across the township. The rules are simple. Each "team" must have a minimum of Rally winners Jason Barlow and sons Grayson and Landon. Photo: Tracy Gayda two people per car. One person to drive and obey the rules of the road; one to read out the questions and fill in the answers as you travel along the highways and byways. Three or four peo- and his sons, Grayson and Landon. It was great to see these two ple per car can make it fun, plus more eyes to search for the young people enjoying a day with their Dad learning about right answer. This car rally gave you a chance to stretch your their local history. legs as you searched for clues and discover local history up A rambling heritage car rally is a fun event for young and close. The route guided you to public places and at no time did old. It can be held rain or shine (we lucked out with gorgeous participants need to enter private property. It was not a race, but weather). A tip sheet of additional facts and web links to an enjoyable drive. explore more was given at the end of the day to all partici- At the conclusion of the tour, participants were welcomed to pants. a chili and buns lunch while they waited for the winners to be announced. Prizes were donated by local businesses. The gen- Tracy Gayda is a member of the CHO/PCO Board of erosity and heritage support given enabled all to go home with Directors and Chair of Heritage Elizabethtown-Kitley a token from the day. This year's winners were Jason Barlow
Second place team from Seeley’s Bay. Rambling along back roads Photo: Tracy Gayda CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 49 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 3 Stratford Festival's Communications Director to Open 2016 Conference
Our heritage is part of our identity as a community, and we should celebrate it. So says David Prosser, communications director for the Stratford Festival, who will be the opening keynote speaker when Stratford and St. Marys host the Ontario Heritage Conference, May 12-15, 2016. "Stratford the theatre town is a far richer, more interesting place to live - a place more likely to attract people of imagination and creative enterprise - for having once been the Stratford renowned for furniture factories and railways," says Prosser. "We have a town that once relied on industry, which involved big buildings with high ceilings. When the industries declined, those buildings sat empty. "Over the course of the Festival's history, Stratford has remade itself as a cultural destination and a natural home for artists and other people who feel that appreciation of our history enriches our pre- sent lives. And they have seen potential in many of our disused spaces." Prosser points to several buildings the Festival has adaptively reused, among them the Avon The- atre, which had been a vaudeville house and then a movie theatre. The Tom Patterson Theatre was once The Stratford Casino, a summer dance hall in the big-band era, and also the city's badminton club. As well, the Festival has created offices and rehearsal space in the former Stratford teachers' college, built in 1908, closed in 1973. "Sometimes a building is just too far gone to be worth saving," says Prosser. "But we should always be looking for ways to transform rather than to simply erase. The richest and most interesting results are achieved when tradition is regarded as something to be built on, not over." More than 300 delegates are expected to attend the conference, sponsored by the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario and Community Heritage Ontario. The Stratford-Perth branch of the ACO is taking the lead in planning, organizing and managing the event. The local planning committee also includes members from the St. Marys Heritage Committee, the Town of St. Marys, the Stratford Tourism Alliance and the Stratford Heritage Committee.
For more information, contact Dean Robinson, at [email protected].
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 50 of 85 4 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 Jimmy Thompson Memorial Pool is Treading Water
Paul R. King n the October 2013 edition of consultation with the Hamilton Municipal Provincial designation, as introduced ICHOnews, I wrote an article about Heritage Committee, approved inclusion in the 2005 amendments to the Ontario the fight to preserve the Jimmy Thompson of the property on the Municipal Register Heritage Act, is intended to be a reserve Memorial Pool in Hamilton. A letter was of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or power and is not meant as a substitute for written to Michael Chan, then Minister of Interest. Currently, the property is on the municipal action to protect properties of Tourism, Culture and Sport, asking for register but not designated. cultural heritage value. Even when prop- assistance in the preservation of this The Hamilton MHC reviewed a 200 erty is considered to have provincial sig- building, constructed for the first British page report prepared for Hamilton Public nificance, heritage protection by the local Empire Games (now called the Common- Works and recommended to Council that municipality is the preferred course of wealth Games) held in 1930. the swimming pool property be preserved action under the Act. As the level of gov- The letter to Minister Chan proposed and designated. The Committee recog- ernment closest to local communities, they that with the upcoming Pan Am Games, a nized that the pool is of cultural heritage are in the best position to make effective ceremony designating this swimming pool value due to its physical design, its setting decisions about the conservation of these would be a fitting first use of the "Sport" within the community, and its historic properties. Minister's designation powers under the association with the development of local The Act does not mention that this Ontario Heritage Act. As you might public recreation facilities. It is not clear power is to be kept in reserve. The intent expect, the Minister did not "take the at this time whether Council will ever des- to keep it in reverse appears to be policy plunge." A second letter was sent to ignate this property. decision by the Ministry. One wonders Michael Coteau, the current Minister, Unfortunately, the opportunity to draw whether there would ever be a circum- again asking for support. As you might attention to this facility during the Pan Am stance where the Minister would feel jus- expect, this Minister was not willing to Games has been lost. The Ministry of tified in using the provincial designation dive into the deep water. Tourism, Culture and Sport has a stock power. In December 2014, Hamilton City answer to all requests for provincial desig- Council approved the recommendations nation. In this case, the Ministry letter Paul R. King is a member of the contained in a staff report and, following dated June 5, 2015 states: CHO/PCO Board of Directors. The National Trust Announces Award Recipients
he National Trust for Canada congratu- munity consultation, financial incentives, urban Tlates the recipients of its 2015 National design, youth engagement, and education. Leadership Awards for outstanding contributions This year's National Trust Leadership Awards also in their fields: the Prince of Wales Prize, the recognize individual excellence. Ms. Julia Gersovitz Gabrielle Léger Medal, and Lieutenant Gover- of Montreal is the recipient of the Gabrielle Léger nor's Award. Medal for Lifetime Achievement in recognition of In keeping with his commitment to architecture, the environ- her forty-year contribution to heritage conservation in Canada. ment, and inner city renewal, His Royal Highness agreed to lend Ms. Marianne Fedori of Edmonton is the recipient of the Lieu- his title to the creation of the Prince of Wales Prize to be awarded tenant Governor's Award for Heritage Conservation at the Provin- annually to the government of a municipality that has demonstrat- cial Level for her tireless efforts in preserving and promoting the ed a strong and sustained commitment to the conservation of its history and heritage of Alberta. historic places. For further information about the 2015 National Trust Leader- The jury selected the Town of Grimsby in recognition of its ship Award recipients and program, contact Carolyn Quinn, dedication to protecting its heritage assets over the past thirty Director, Communications, [email protected] (613 years through a series of policies and programs that include com- 237 1066 ext. 229). Celebrating Heritage Day 2016
or Heritage Day 2016, the National Trust for Canada Heritage tourism offers adventure, storied history, vibrant Fencourages Canadians to celebrate Distinctive Destina- culture, and stunning landscapes for every age group and inter- tions: Experience Historic Places during the week of February 15. est: from trendy neighbourhoods to rural farmsteads, kid Canada is rich in historic sites, special places, and events friendly forts to sacred landmarks, and country inns to grand that tell our story and delight visitors from near and far. Our hotels. distinctive destinations are as varied as Canadians themselves: Whether travelling across town or cross country, Canada's Aboriginal Pow Wows, music halls, traditional fishing villages, distinctive destinations are definitely worth the trip! Learn more historic lighthouses, old stone mills, prairie festivals, and by visiting nationaltrustcanada.ca. botanical gardens.
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 51 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 5 City of Toronto Official Plan Heritage Amendments
ity of Toronto Official Plan Amendment 199 was adopted by City Council in April 2013 and approved by the Minister of CMunicipal Affairs and Housing that November. Amendment 199 addresses several policy areas, including:
establishment of a Municipal Heritage Register conservation of properties that demonstrate cultural heritage value or interest promotion of heritage awareness creation of incentives for conserving designated heritage resources Heritage Impact Assessments identification, designation, and conservation of Heritage Conservation Districts identification and conservation of Archaeological Resources protection of important views
The Building Industry and Land Development Association and other parties filed forty nine appeals to the Amendment regarding these heritage policies. Through mediation at the Ontario Municipal Board, modifications were made to soften or clarify the policies, such as:
a number of references were changed from "protect" to "conserve" to provide more flexibility there is more flexibility to move a heritage building or part thereof, where its particular cultural values or attributes can be conserved in spite of the move protected views may now only be established by an Official Plan amendment, as opposed to a Council resolution, so it is more difficult to protect views but the idea is to foster certainty and to enhance transparency by listing a property on the Municipal Heritage Register, it no longer means that it is deemed to be "significant" for the pur- poses of the Provincial Policy Statement, resulting in less protection for listed properties Heritage Conservation District Plans must now include protocols for amendment and periodic review, which further quali- fies the plans and triggers appropriate updates, and Council's determination of "conservation" must now include the consideration of the applicant's Heritage Impact Assessment.
For details, refer to Case No. PL 131323 at the Ontario Municipal Board website and the decision issued May 12, 2015.
CHO/PCO Board Copyright Notice Circulate Meetings CHOnews Contributors to CHOnews permit the CHO/PCO Board of Directors' further copying of their works only for the Community Her- meetings are open to any MHC purposes of educating the public on heritage itage Ontario encour- matters. Copyright remains with the author member. Please contact the Corpo- ages member Municipal or creator. Credit must be given to the author rate Secretary to confirm each date Heritage Committees to or creator and to the source, CHOnews, on before attending. Scheduled meet- circulate CHOnews to all copies made. No work can be reprinted in ings will be held at 6282 Kingston any published form without permission of all mayors and munici- Road, Scarborough. the copyright holder. pal council members. CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 52 of 85 6 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 A Tale of Two Parts - Part IVs in Part Vs
Dan Schneider his is a bit tricky. The original 1975 Ontario Heritage Act 2005. With changes coming to HCD designation provisions, espe- Tprohibited individual (Part IV) designations in a (Part V) cially the new requirements for an enforceable HCD Plan, the Heritage Conservation District. As far as one can tell, the reason policy question about the relationship between Part IV and Part V for this was that property owners should not be subjected to two designations demanded a more sophisticated response than in designation regimes (both of which were new in 1975) applying 1975 and 2002. Rules were set out for which Part applies (OHA to the same property. subsections 41(2.1) - (2.4)). Then Part IV designations accelerated much sooner than Part These rules are not well understood in some municipalities. Vs, which were slow to be embraced by municipalities. The result The policy intention is to ensure a more uniform and holistic over the years was that Councils wanting an HCD, were often approach with improved HCD Plans and controls applying to faced with a choice: repeal the existing individual Part IV desig- all properties in the District. At the same time, it recognizes nations to clear the way for the District, or have "holes" in the that municipalities might still want to designate under Part IV, District where HCD guidelines would not apply. individual properties inside the District boundary. The reasons The case that really highlighted this issue concerned Port Dal- could be for recognition, eligibility for Heritage Property Tax housie, the old canal community on Lake Ontario. In 2001, St. Relief and other incentives, and/or for controls on interior her- Catharines opted to repeal three Part IV individual property desig- itage features. nations in Port Dalhousie in preparation for HCD designation. Essentially, the OHA now sets that where you have a Part IV There were formal objections by people who were understandably in a Part V, and there is an HCD Plan adopted post 2005, the Part confused by what was going on, and this triggered the Conserva- V provisions apply with respect to alteration, demolition, etc., and tion Review Board process. The Review Board supported the the Part IV property is subject to the HCD Plan. The exception is repeals in 2002, but the result was that the HCD was delayed and where there is a designation of interior features. For alterations to not approved until 2004. those interior features, the Part IV process applies. To address the issue, the Ontario Heritage Act was amended in Remember, if you have a pre-2005 HCD and Plan (which is 2002 (as one of the "efficiency" changes made that year) to allow still only a guideline), then Part IV applies (i.e., the 2002 rules). Part IV designations in Part V HCDs (OHA subsection 41(2)). This will be the governance until there is a new HCD Plan adopt- The amendment meant that Part IV provisions of the OHA would ed under the 2005 amendments of the OHA. Capiche? apply to these properties; but where there was a District Plan (not required for HCDs at that date and only a guideline), it would be Dan Schneider is the former Senior Policy Advisor, Cul- used to help guide review of alteration/demolition applications for ture Policy Unit, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, the Part IVs as well. and a long time heritage advocate. Meanwhile, the Province was preparing final proposals for the comprehensive amendments to the OHA which became law in
Dear Friends, Colleagues, Heritage Junkies:
For some time now I've felt the need for an online forum for more complex/technical/tricky ques- tions and issues related to the Ontario Heritage Act and related planning and environmental legisla- tion and policies. As I'm not sure how to address this, I'm starting with a personal blog called OHA+M (Ontario Heritage Act and More) that will address a wide variety of heritage sticky issues, most related to the Act, and invite comments and questions from readers. There'll be some more "fun" stuff too!
Please check it out at:danschneiderheritage.blogspot.ca. It's a public blog so feel free to let oth- ers know. Would love to hear your feedback.
Dan Schneider.
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 53 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 7 Culture Talks
he Ministry of Tourism, Culture Send written submissions munities through their tax dollars. Tand Sport has begun a consulta- directly to the Ministry; and, Is the Ontario Heritage Act giving you tion initiative to develop a first ever Cul- the tools you need to promote and pre- ture Strategy to be released in 2016. The Attend the Town Hall meetings serve built heritage in your community? initiative began in September and will run being held by the Ministry in Thunder Do you find the information you need until December 7, 2015. Bay (October 22), Sudbury (October on the Heritage section of the Ministry This a chance for heritage groups and 29), Ottawa (November 4), Markham website? individuals to give a voice to the impor- (November 10), Toronto (November What programs and initiatives do you tance heritage plays in the culture of 12), London (November 19), Kingston think are working or not working? Ontario. Participating will send a clear (November 25), Mississauga (Decem- Does the Ministry see heritage as a message to the provincial government that ber 1), Windsor (December 3). Hamil- priority? heritage is a vital component in Ontario's ton and Barrie have already held Town What ideas do you have to strengthen vibrant cultural landscape. The outcomes Hall meetings. Locations and times are heritage activity and protection in your developed during this process will identi- posted on the website. community and Ontario? fy cultural components that Ontario resi- Read the Discussion paper on the web- dents believe are important for future pri- As members of municipal heritage site. There is a section devoted to cultural orities and actions by the Ministry. Get committees, you have probably accessed heritage on page 14 (mtc.gov.on.ca/en/ pub- involved. some of the heritage services provided by lications/Culture_Strategy_Discussion_Pap There are three ways you can partici- the Ministry. Do you think they are doing er.pdf). On page 9, there are some guiding pate: a good job for heritage? principles the Ministry has outlined. Do Long time MHC members may remem- these adequately address the priorities that Visit the Ministry's website ber past initiatives that worked for their you have for heritage? (ontario.ca/page/ontarios-culture-strat- communities but may no longer be avail- Community Heritage Ontario is dedi- egy), where you can get more infor- able. Remember when the province helped cated to participating in this initiative. We mation and comment on what you to fund homeowners with improvements to are one collective voice. Heritage needs think is important for the Ministry to their heritage protected properties? This has many voices to protect the cultural values focus on; been downloaded to municipalities already that it has and to make heritage a priority struggling to meet the needs of their com- in the Ministry's new strategy.
CHOnews CHO/PCO Mission Statement Deadlines To encourage the development of municipally appointed heritage advisory CHOnews issues are Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter. The committees and to further the identification, preservation, interpretation, and deadlines for submission are as wise use of community heritage locally, provincially, and nationally. follows:
March 10 (Spring issue) June 10 (Summer issue) Disclaimer
October 10 (Fall issue) The content of CHOnews does not contain nor reflect any opinion, position, December 10 (Winter issue) or influence of the CHO/PCO Board of Directors or the Editor of CHOnews. Submissions received for publication in CHOnews are changed only for pur- Submissions are always welcomed. poses of legibility and accuracy to the extent that can be readily determined.
Strategic Plan Survey
Community Heritage Ontario wants to know what is important to you and your municipal heritage committee. Please take the time to complete our online survey at: surveymonkey.com/r/CHO-PCO. As CHO rolls into the new Strategic Plan for 2015 to 2020, we want to ensure that we are providing the services you need to make heritage a pri- ority in your community. CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 54 of 85 8 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 President's Message
Wayne Morgan ommunity Heritage Ontario exists ry role. Recently, on the advice of the Cto help Municipal Heritage MHC, Kenora City Council designated Committees develop their capabilities to the Carnegie Library. Kenora City Hall, advise municipal councils on the conser- formerly the federal building and post vation of built and cultural heritage land- office, is a testament to the City's commit- scapes. We at CHO, like you, are volun- ment to heritage. teers strongly committed to heritage con- The Georgina MHC last met as a servation. We cannot carry out our role committee in June 2014. Like many without your assistance, input, and par- MHCs, some new members who have ticipation. never dealt with heritage matters were To that end, over the next year the appointed following last fall's municipal CHO/PCO Board of Directors will visit election. To assist in educating the mem- MHCs throughout Ontario to speak bers, CHO's website contains recordings about CHO activities, find out what of three webinars dealing with the role issues are facing your MHC, and when of MHCs and Part IV and Part V desig- an MHC is not a CHO member, encour- nation. These webinars are available to age them to join. anyone accessing the website. During this past summer, I had the The Meaford MHC, like Georgina, is exemplified by its municipal office, a pleasure of visiting three MHCs in Keno- a new committee and new CHO mem- heritage building. ra, Georgina, and Meaford. The Kenora ber. Although it faces a challenging I look forward to visiting other MHC is a long time CHO member and is application in its downtown heritage MHCs and working with them through responsible for a community improvement area, the community has displayed a CHO. program in addition to its heritage adviso- commitment to heritage conservation as
Meaford Town Hall, September 2015 Kenora City Hall, June 2015 Photo: Wayne Morgan Photo: Wayne Morgan
Who is your Heritage Hero? We Want to Hear From You
CHOnews is YOUR quarterly publication. We want CHOnews wants you to share your personal her- to know about the initiatives, achievements, challenges, itage anecdotes or stories of your inspirational heritage and concerns of your Municipal Heritage Committee. heroes. Submit 500 to 1,000 words with photographs
or illustrations (jpg file format, high resolution) and Information networking through CHOnews is important.
captions to [email protected] Submissions are welcome at any time.
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 55 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 9 Community Heritage Ontario Service Awards 2016
Community Heritage Ontario is pleased to present the 1st Annual Heritage Service Awards. The CHO/PCO Board of Directors invites nominations for 2 awards to be presented at the Ontario Her- itage Conference in Stratford/St. Marys, May 12 -15, 2016.
One award is given annually to an individual in each category
1. Service to CHO - members are encouraged to submit the names of CHO members who have provided a minimum of 5 years of service to CHO; have shown leadership in CHO; have furthered the cause of heritage in Ontario.
2. Service to Municipal Heritage Committees who are members of CHO - members are encouraged to submit the names of members of their Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC) who have provided a minimum of 5 years of service to their MHC; have shown leadership in the MHC; have furthered the cause of heritage in their local community. The MHC must be a member in good standing with CHO.
The nominator must submit the following: Category of Nomination Name and Contact Information of Nominee Number of Years of Service Contributions made in the nominating category Name and Contact Information of the Nominating Member(s) or Municipal Heritage Committee
Standing CHO/PCO Board Members are not eligible for an award.
Please send your nomination to: Community Heritage Ontario 24 Conlins Road Scarborough, ON M1C 1C3 or by email [email protected]
Deadline for Nominations is Thursday, March 24, 2016
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 56 of 85 10 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 CHO/PCO Board of Directors 2015-2016
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Chair of Finance Tom Millar Etobicoke 416.233.8520 President Paul R. King [email protected] Wayne Morgan St. Marys 416.274.4686 CORPORATE SECRETARY/ TREASURER Sutton West 905.722.5398 [email protected] waynemorgan@ Rick Schofield communityheritageontario.ca DIRECTORS Scarborough 416.282.2710 Vice-Presidents Bob Martindale [email protected] Tracy Gayda Ajax 905.683.8703 PAST PRESIDENT Toledo 613.275.2117 bobmartindale@ Roscoe Petkovic tracygayda@ communityheritageontario.ca communityheritageontario.ca Halton Hills 905.877.4586 Fred Robbins roscoepetkovic@ Ginette Guy Stouffville 905.640.6781 communityheritageontario.ca Cornwall 613.363.5312 fredrobbins@ New General Inquiry E-mail [email protected] communityheritageontario.ca [email protected] News from the CHO/PCO Board of Directors Advertise in CHOnews! he CHO/PCO Board of Direc- locations for future conferences such at Ttors met as usual on September Toronto (2017?) and Sault Ste. Marie Reach a province-wide readership 27 to discuss the business of the Corpo- (2018?). composed of all Municipal Heritage ration. The Communications Committee Committee members, heritage societies, The new president, Wayne Morgan, reported that it will be working with the municipal officials, and heritage con- reported that he had visited several Education Committee to introduce two scious individuals! MHCs in the northern parts of the annual CHO awards in 2016. The two DISPLAY ADS must be supplied province, including Kenora where he proposed awards are Service to CHO in camera-ready tiff or pdf format. was received by an enthusiastic group of and Service to a Municipal Heritage heritage volunteers. Committee. CHO/MHC members will Location of ads is at the discretion of The Secretary reported that member- be asked to discuss possible nomina- the Editor. Cost is per issue: ship in CHO is over 900 individuals tions and be prepared to submit nomina- Full Page $300 from 120 MHCs and heritage groups. tions early in 2016. Half Page $150 CHOnews will be sent out electronically The report from the Ministry of to those members that provide email Tourism, Culture and Sport was circu- Third Page $100 addresses. This will reduce printing and lated. It outlines several orientation Quarter Page $75 mailings costs and keep the group mem- workshops completed and/or planned One Sixth 5”x 2.6” $50 bership fees at $75 for the coming year. for later this year. Business Card $25 The Conference Committee reported The next Board of Directors meeting the 2015 Ontario Heritage Conference will be held on November 22, 2015. All CLASSIFIED ADS: $12.00 per column held in Niagara was a financial success CHO/MHC members are invited to sub- inch with over 200 delegates attending. The mit comments and suggestions for To place an ad in CHOnews, please vast majority represented MHCs and Board consideration prior to the Agenda contact Rick Schofield at municipal staff. Plans for the 2016 OHC deadline of November 12. to be held in Stratford/St. Marys, May 416.282.2710 12-15, 2016, are proceeding well. Sev- [email protected] eral sessions are still open for interested presenters. The Joint Conference Com- mittee (CHO, ACO, OHT, and OAHP) will begin discussion about possible
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 57 of 85 Fall / automne 2015 CHOnews 11 CHOnews is published quarterly by Community Heritage Ontario.
Additional copies of CHOnews are available from Rick Schofield at the corporate mailing address or by calling 416.282.2710.
Submission Deadlines March 10, June 10, October 10, and December 10
The financial support of the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport is gratefully acknowledged.
Corporate Address CHO, 24 Conlins Road, Scarborough, ON M1C 1C3 www.communityheritageontario.ca [email protected]
Let’s hear from you! Send your news and comments to the Editor for publication in CHOnews.
Articles should be in Word format. Images should be sent as .jpg attachments in high quality resolution (300 dpi). Do not embed the images in the text of the article. Captions and credits need to be provided. Unwelcome Visitor Newspaper articles as updates to Municipal Heritage Committee activi- ties cannot be used without permis- An early 20th century house on sion of the newspaper and/or the original author. Text written by the Robinson Street in St. Marys was MHC is encouraged. extensively damaged by a runaway Articles are published in the language front end loader. The machine lost its they are received. hydraulics, disabling the brakes and Editor and Technical Production by Celia Laur. Contact at Corporate the steering. It was being used across Address above. the street at a new house construction CHO/PCO is on Facebook. project. ISSN 1201 - 9852
CHO News - Fall 2015 Page 58 of 85 12 CHOnews Fall / automne 2015 Why not send us a story, an ar cle for the next CHOnews bulle n…
Our members have told us that they would like to learn more about best prac- ces. What works and what doesn’t...they want to learn from YOU and find out what’s going on in YOUR area.
MHC members are a hard working bunch, they know adversity and they are always planning and scheming to fix what’s wrong with the heritage world...Why not tell us about it, we are listening, We care!
Published 4 mes a year the deadlines for submissions are March 10, June 10, October 10 and December 10...but hey...don’t be limited by those dates...send us your work at any me and we will publish in future edi ons.
Send ar cles and original photographs (no photocopies) as a achments to : [email protected]
www.communityheritageontario.ca
CHO News - Request for Heritage Stories or Photos for Bullet... Page 59 of 85 Heritage Matters
A publication of the Ontario Heritage Trust Volume 13, Issue 2, October 2015
Revealing the past: Ontario’s archaeological heritage
www.heritagetrust.on.ca @ONheritage OntarioHeritageTrust
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 60 of 85 Revealing the past: Ontario’s archaeological heritage
As you will read in this issue, the scale of Though important, archaeological fieldwork is just the beginning of a archaeological activity in Ontario is massive, process that can lead to an enriched understanding of the past. The growing rapidly and is primarily undertaken by results – the surveys and data, the collections – require recording, testing consulting archaeologists. Each newly discovered and analysis, comparative study and, for some of the rare, beautiful and archaeological site is part of Ontario’s non- most interesting artifacts, public presentation. renewable cultural heritage. Many of these fragile sites are associated with indigenous peoples and demonstrate The Trust’s mandate for conservation includes property of historical, great diversity of size, age and form. The Ontario Heritage Trust preserves architectural, archaeological, recreational, esthetic, natural and scenic archaeological sites, some of which are up to 10,000 years old. These interests, and we see all of these interests and values as interrelated, sites contribute to our understanding of important periods in Ontario’s connected in the landscape over time and place. We seek out and history, including advances in ancient technology, conflicts and major embrace multiple perspectives in all of our programs and activities. upheavals, the development of responsible government and the industrialization of our cities. Without archaeology, we would be In this issue, we hear from noted archaeologists and also explore bereft of many of these insights. the values, approaches and meanings voiced by other experts. This multidisciplinary and multicultural exchange also helps extend the When it comes to archaeology, preservation is often pitted against discussion and increase public interest in, and accessibility to, the field of development. Unlike heritage buildings and landscapes, which are archaeology and to the artifacts themselves. I hope that you will enjoy increasingly preserved or incorporated into development, most the range of perspectives we have assembled in this issue and that it archaeological sites are recorded and removed in their entirety through prompts you to learn more about archaeology and how it continues to complete excavation. While archaeologists mitigate the impact of this transform our understanding of the history of our province. approach through careful excavation, documentation and reporting procedures, it nevertheless devalues the importance of history, culture and diversity. If we are going to preserve archaeology in Ontario, we need to change our approach to these rich cultural archives by proactively Beth Hanna creating and integrating archaeological reserves – and the stories CEO, Ontario Heritage Trust they hold – into our communities.
Contents Archaeology 101, by Ron Williamson 2 • Looking at archaeology from all angles, Martha Latta, Richard Zane Smith and Michel Savard 5 • Sustaining Ontario’s archaeology digitally, Neal Ferris, Rhonda Bathurst, Michael Carter and Namir Ahmed 8 • The history of archaeological investigations at the Thomson-Walker Site, by Alicia Hawkins 12 • Breaking ground, by Lena Rye 14 • Challenges of archaeological collections management, by Robert MacDonald 15 • By the numbers, compiled by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 17 • Seeing the unseen: archaeology and geophysics, by By Dena Doroszenko 18 • Resources, compiled by Patryk Weglorz 20
This issue of Heritage Matters, published in English and French, has a combined The inclusion of any advertisement or insert in this publication does not imply circulation of 10,400. Archived copies of Heritage Matters are available on our or constitute an endorsement or acceptance by the Province of Ontario of any website at www.heritagetrust.on.ca/hm. of the advertisers, products or services advertised. The Ontario Heritage Trust is not responsible for errors, omissions or misrepresentations contained in any For information, contact: advertisement or insert. Ontario Heritage Trust 10 Adelaide Street East, Suite 302 Publication Agreement Number 1738690 Toronto, Ontario E&OE ISSN 1198-2454 (Print) M5C 1J3 ISSN 1911-446X (PDF/Online) Telephone: 416-325-5015 10/15 Fax: 416-314-0744 Aussi disponible en français. Email: [email protected] Website: www.heritagetrust.on.ca
© Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2015 © Ontario Heritage Trust, 2015 Photos © Ontario Heritage Trust, 2015, unless otherwise indicated.
Produced by the Ontario Heritage Trust The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors (an agency of the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport). and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Ontario Heritage Trust or the Government of Ontario. Editor Gordon Pim Graphic Designer Paul Arcari Editorial Committee: Beth Hanna, Sean Fraser, Paul Dempsey, Dena Doroszenko, Wayne Kelly, Michael Sawchuck and Alan Wojcik. Cover: Excavation of the 1819 icehouse, This publication is printed on recycled paper using vegetable Macdonell-Willimson House, Pointe Fortune oil-based inks. Help us protect our environment by passing along or recycling this publication when you have no further need for it. Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 61 of 85 Heritage Matters
Archaeology fundamental to our province’s heritage
The field of archaeology has long provided a tangible means of interpreting Ontario’s past by illustrating the many and varied stories of those who came before us through the physical evidence they left behind. In so doing, it has the potential to bring to light information and insight about the lives and cultures of many people in this province, often including those whose voices may be largely absent from the official historical record. For instance, the results of archaeological investigations continue to provide an important complement to indigenous oral history in the province, as well as revealing the stories of many other diverse elements of the population.
One must also bear in mind that archaeology is a scientific discipline that takes an empirical approach that can be applied to a multitude of places across time. The physical act of excavation, though an important source of information, forever alters a location. With each passing year, the application of new technological innovations has enabled archaeologists to obtain more exacting and comprehensive information from smaller, more strategic samples, thus preserving archaeological sites for the possibility of further enhanced study through the application of more advanced methods in future.
It is important for those engaged in the field of archaeology to share their data and insights in both academic and popular settings, and to continue to find new ways to reach and connect with diverse audiences more meaningfully.
The articles in this issue of Heritage Matters provide an opportunity for readers to learn more about archaeology in Ontario from a number of different but complementary perspectives. I hope that readers may be inspired to delve more deeply into this important and fascinating field, which is so fundamental to the knowledge of our province’s heritage.
Thomas H.B. Symons C.C., O.Ont, FRSC, LLD, D.Litt., D.U., D.Cn.L., FRGS, KSS Chairman
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 62 of 85 1 Archaeology 101
By Ron Williamson
What is archaeology? This may seem like a straightforward perception. Even worse, though, was that 14 per cent question, but you would be surprised with the answers of the people surveyed thought that the archaeological that Canadians give to this question. In the early 2000s, record in Canada was only 500 years old. One in three the University of British Columbia and Department thought that Canada’s occupation extended across less of Canadian Heritage carried out a public survey in than a millennium! Also surprising was that almost 70 per collaboration with Ipsos Reid on Canadians’ perception, cent of respondents thought that there were fewer than knowledge and attitudes toward archaeological heritage. 1,000 archaeological sites in Canada – one-third of people They surveyed a random group of more than 1,500 people thought fewer than 500 sites. across Canada, including 540 respondents from Ontario. The results of this research were surprising, to say the Ontario alone has over 32,000 registered archaeological least. sites, the vast majority dating to between 12,000 and 300 years ago! Most people, then, are unaware of the antiquity First, the good news. Interestingly, 82 per cent of the of our nation and province – and the rich archaeological group had a generally accurate notion of archaeology as record of that history. Even today, students graduate from the study of the ancient and historical past, which often secondary school with only a cursory understanding of involves excavation and scientific analytical methods. archaeology. What was less welcome news was that 40 per cent of these folks combined archaeology with paleontology In Ontario universities, most archaeology is taught as and the hunt for dinosaur remains – a not-uncommon social science in anthropology departments. Anthropology
An exterior cesspit at the Toronto General Hospital, part of a complex waste management system constructed in the early 1800s
2Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 63 of 85 Excavations of a hillside midden (refuse area) at a mid-15th-century ancestral Wendat village situated near Brooklin, Ontario, and excavated in advance of the construction of Highway 407. Note the grid, stakes and string for recording the strata in the midden so that the context of every artifact is recorded.
is the interdisciplinary study of the human experience, Ontario now boasts some of the most comprehensive past and present, employing a variety of perspectives. legislation in North America related to archaeological As a sub-discipline of anthropology, archaeology studies resource conservation within the land development human groups that lived in the past by looking at the process. The legislative basis for this mandate was first complexities of their social, political, economic and enacted in the 1970s, and has since increased steadily spiritual lives. Archaeologists also focus frequently in effectiveness. In particular, the Planning Act and the on the patterning and nature of material culture. Environmental Assessment Act both now require that The undeveloped lands of Ontario are littered with archaeological resource assessments – as well as built the remains of people’s lives. Stone projectile points, heritage and cultural landscape analyses – be carried out fragments of ceramic vessels and broken bottles and in advance of most forms of land-disturbing activities, plates are all traces of those lives – and the challenge whether these are public initiatives (such as infrastructure faced by archaeologists is to bring this past to life by projects) or private developments related to housing or examining the artifacts and the context in which they are industrial subdivisions. found. It is for this reason that the very practice of archaeology When we can bring the documentary and archaeological has changed substantially in Ontario and other records together, we have an even better look at the jurisdictions in North America. People generally believe complexity and foreign world that is the past. Even that most archaeology is undertaken by university- and in major urban centres, we can find the remains of museum-based archaeologists. The reality in Ontario significant colonial structures that survive under everyday and elsewhere in North America is that the majority of sites such as parking lots. archaeology (over 90 per cent in Ontario) is undertaken by archaeologists working in the private sector, carrying We also need to remember that archaeological sites out assessments and excavation in advance of land are fragile and non-renewable. Today, the province and development. its municipal governments work together to conserve these sites. But that was not always the case. There were Another important consideration is that the majority of staggering losses to the archaeological record of Ontario sites in Ontario were left by people living here before the in the 20th century as hundreds of sites were destroyed arrival of Europeans – and that these sites have cultural by urban growth before legislation was introduced to as well as spiritual significance for their descendants. The abate the pace of this devastation. ancient aboriginal occupants of these sites left no written
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 64 of 85 3 record of their lives, but their legacy consists of the oral astounding feeling. Indeed, there is no experience quite histories and traditions passed on to their descendants like it. Thankfully, however, we have organizations and within the traces of their settlements that still such as the Ontario Heritage Trust, the Toronto and survive today. Region Conservation Authority, the Museum of Ontario Archaeology and the Ontario Archaeological Society who The Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport has are dedicated to bringing our archaeological world to life addressed the interests of descendant communities through opportunities in education and tourism. I hope in the identification, evaluation and conservation of that, one day, every citizen in Ontario will appreciate the archaeological sites and material culture. It encourages profound archaeological record in our province. archaeologists to engage communities early in the life of a project – preferably during the planning phase – but Ron Williamson is the Chair of the Board of Directors also requires community involvement when formulating for the Museum of Ontario Archaeology in London, and implementing strategies for mitigating the impact on and the Chief Archaeologist and Managing Partner aboriginal archaeological sites through protection and/or of Archaeological Services Inc. Photos courtesy of salvage excavation. Archaeological Services Inc.
Ontario’s archaeological heritage also offers considerable economic opportunities. One of the best ways to learn about archaeology is to visit a site and participate in an excavation. Finding a War of 1812 button or projectile point and recognizing that you are the first person to touch it in hundreds or even thousands of years is an
The human side of a double-headed effigy talisman recycled from a 14th-century ancestral Wendat pipe bowl found in Barrie, Ontario. The other side is a representation of a wolf or dog-like head with erect ears and a pointed snout.
This projectile point, made of translucent chert and found recently near Brantford, Ontario, is several thousand years old. Photo: Christian Wilson
4Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 65 of 85 Looking at archaeology from all angles
By Martha Latta, Richard Zane Smith and Michel Savard
Every archaeological artifact tells its own unique story. But what it says can be – and is – interpreted differently, depending on who is examining it. Starting with a single artifact from the Trust’s own collections, we explore different perspectives that tell a more complete story about the artifact, its origins and those who made and historically used it.
Excavated in July 1995 during the University of Toronto at Scarborough’s archaeological field school led by Dr. Martha Latta, this clay pipe was discovered on an archaeological site named Thomson-Walker at a Trust property near Moonstone, Ontario.
Together, the following perspectives create a complex This particular pipe – unlike most pipes found in and holistic view of the artifact. They offer unique and archaeological sites – is relatively intact. There has been relevant understandings of why this object remains some breakage at the mouthpiece, but this would not have significant today. made the pipe unusable. For the owner’s own reasons, he or she chose to discard the pipe rather than to mend Archaeological the stem. It still contains the plug of charred vegetable By Dr. Martha A. Latta material. We know that the Huron grew and smoked tobacco, a variety that is harsher than the Virginia tobacco We were excavating the favoured by today’s smokers, but which would mature in defensive palisade area of the Ontario’s comparatively short growing season. They may Thomson-Walker site when have smoked other plants as well, for medicinal or religious we found this pipe. Like most reasons. Unfortunately, it is difficult to identify plants from of the larger Huron villages their leaves. Seeds and pollen are most useful for this, and in the 1640s, the Thomson- smoking tobacco consists only of leaf parts. Walker site was surrounded by a solid line of tree trunks. Palisades kept out enemies, French writers reported that the Huron smoked when they of course, but they also kept out bears, wolves and other conferred in council on political issues. They also smoked large, wild animals – as well as keeping small children from when travelling long distances, in order to keep alert and straying too far from their homes. Another use for the to stave off hunger pangs. It is widely assumed that only palisade was to define the area of the site where trash and men smoked the pipes, but this reflects the fact that 17th- food remains could be dumped, as Huron villages were century French writers had little to say about the activities usually very neat. of the Huron women. I suspect that senior women of the clans might have enjoyed a pipe of tobacco as well, while The pipe we discovered was made of local clay, fashioned resolving social issues within the village. In this case, we by hand and fired to a brick-like hardness. The style of the can picture the smoker tossing the pipe – still smoking – in pipe is one of the most common in 17th-century Huron frustration or in satisfaction with a day’s accomplishments. villages: a round bowl decorated with rings traced in the clay. Like all of the Huron’s clay pipes and pots, it was not painted. The stem was made by wrapping the wet clay Martha Latta is a Professor Emerita in the University of around a reed or twig, which burned away during firing Toronto at Scarborough anthropology department. to leave a neat smoke hole. Its owner could have made a replacement in a day or two.
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 66 of 85 5 Artistic pipe with a reed or sumac stem in our ceremonies today. By Richard Zane Smith The pipe is passed to each of the faithkeepers, the helpers who work, and all those who have been asked to sing or to yanǫⁿdamęʔ ⁿduʔtáraʔ speak. pipe of clay We still grow the same tobacco: naⁿdakęhaǫʔ (nicotiana- With careful hands, this pipe rustica). was likely made by rolling a coil of clay on the smooth Richard Zane Smith is a Wyandot potter, Sǫhahiyǫ of side of a slab of elm bark, the Bear Clan and an enrolled member of the Wyandot using soft clay, thick at the Nation of Kansas. bowl end, tapering to the stem. The bowl was carefully hollowed and shaped. Before being bent into an elbow, Curatorial a smooth skewer pierced the stem and bowl. At times a By Michel Savard smooth, fine stick was actually rolled into the clay and after forming the pipe, it was carefully drawn out. The pipe is set Looking at this pipe, one aside to firm up a little. Some pipes have been found where simple question comes to a cord had been rolled into the coil of clay. It would burn mind. What was the state out in the firing. of mind of the Wendat person behind this last puff The six lines likely have been indented perhaps with the of tobacco smoke? Was it a side of a bone awl, just before the clay was too hard to moment of communing with his ancestors, a moment of communing with a spiritual guide or simply a moment of well-earned relaxation after a long, hard day portaging a birch bark canoe?
To ask the question is to answer it.
Too often, archaeologists and anthropologists – and any average person – interpret any smoking of tobacco by our ancestors as necessarily being a spiritual act. I would opt for the serenity of the moment. Portaging a canoe through the woods requires that you be one with nature and listen to what nature tells you. Smoking tobacco, like dipping a paddle into the river, can bring us to this spiritual awakening that we all seek.
press into. It doesn’t appear to be stone-polished, simply smoothed with fingers. The break in the stem possibly occurred while inserting a reed stem into the fired pipe stem. I’ve had this happen in the past with a clay pipe, creating a similar break.
Pipes like these are fairly easy to fire. One simply places a dry clay pipe near a campfire for an hour or so. Then it’s simply pushed onto the coals. Wood is placed on top to get a good blaze. When burnished with a smooth stone or bone, it can be fired black by placing it beneath a concave potsherd along with some organic material, like a handful of dry pine needles. Such ancestral pipes were common in our Wendat villages, and often were smoked during meetings to clear the mind. We continue to use a small clay
6Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 67 of 85 As a Wendat, the temptation to drop a burning ember into Earth! Sometimes the act of voluntarily burying an object the bowl of this pipe would have been overwhelming. It is in itself a spiritual reflection that must not be desecrated, is true that if this pipe had come to me, regardless of the even if this results in a loss of knowledge for science, no context, I would certainly have dropped this ember in. It is matter what the discipline. We all agree that archaeology lucky for the archeologists that this will never happen. Too has its reason for being, but we have to be careful about much data would go up in smoke. how this archaeology is performed. But don’t worry; I am convinced that modern archaeology is more respectful of my It would be extraordinary to discover a pipe that still ancestors than it was in the past. contained the tobacco that one of my ancestors had placed in it more than 400 years ago! One thing is certain. This This pipe, made with craftsmanship by one of my ancestors, would have been, for me as a Wendat, a great moment was certainly a part of one of the finest moments in the lives of spirituality unlike any I could have imagined – a direct of these real men. connection with my roots, my spirit and (who knows) perhaps with the spirit of this Wendat ancestor from whom Teharihulen Michel Savard is the curator of the Museum I might have learned to get more connected to the genuine of the Huron-Wendat Nation in Wendake, Quebec. things in life, like portaging my canoe!
But, let’s get back to the subject of this fantasy. From an archaeological point of view, this discovery could bring answers to our questions about our Wendat ancestors’ way of life. Otherwise, what would be the use of unearthing, or rather removing, these artifacts from the belly of Mother
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 68 of 85 7 Sustaining Ontario’s archaeology digitally
By Dr. Neal Ferris, Dr. Rhonda Bathurst, Michael Carter and Namir Ahmed
Archaeology has a long history of turning to new accessibility of these findings to enable advancement technologies to advance the pursuit of understanding of research or even appreciation of that rich recovered our ancient past. From measuring the decay of carbon heritage). molecules in organic remains to date sites thousands of years old, to identifying the isotopic signature of Ontario is a world leader in archaeological research the appearance of agriculture in ancient time, to from emerging technologies and in conserving the examining DNA to identify historical personalities or the archaeological heritage of this place. The future of interconnection of people across the globe, many of the archaeology will see the integration of new digital most important discoveries in archaeology have emerged technologies to manage the accumulated record of as much from the lab as from the excavation site itself. conservation activities, thereby enabling the promise of conservation through access, research and engagement Another long tradition in archaeology worldwide is with Ontario’s archaeological heritage by archaeologists, the effort to conserve and document archaeological and by those in society who draw meaning and value sites prior to land development activities. The efforts of from that heritage. government, the development sector and archaeologists over the last 50 years have led to the documentation This trend is best reflected in the efforts of Sustainable of tens of thousands of archaeological sites, as well Archaeology (SA), a research centre that strives to as massive holdings of archaeological remains – all consolidate those dispersed archaeological collections potentially available for scientific analyses and further into one place, provide for the long-term care of advancement of the archaeological past (a potential that material heritage, and to convert those physical nonetheless hampered by the dispersal of these collections into digital information to ensure that this collections to many storage facilities, and the lack of compiled record is accessible online for research, education and appreciation.
Modelling a series of artifact scans into a 3D model.
8Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 69 of 85 Interacting with visual reality creations of ancient environments.
Funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation and remotely by archaeologists and others seeking to explore the Ontario Research Fund, SA is a joint project of the research questions of human-material patterning (either University of Western Ontario and McMaster University, intensively across the region for one time period or in partnership with across deep time trends), the Museum of wherever they happen to Ontario Archaeology. be in the world. SA’s critical goal in compiling the material At SA, an assembly record of Ontario’s line approach to 3D archaeological scanning artifacts allows heritage is to shift the for the relatively rapid current archaeological generation of diagnostic status quo toward artifacts, using a series of a more sustainable structured light scanners, form of practice that each designed for uses and re-uses the scanning objects within record recovered in specific size ranges. Once the province and to created, these 3D models enable a broader of artifacts are accessed engagement with that through SA’s online heritage in society. informational platform. Interacting with visual reality creations of ancient environments But these models can The primary means of also be repurposed within achieving this goal is virtual reality recreations the digitization of those thousands of archaeological of ancient settlements – so that people, using virtual collections. To do this, SA relies heavily on digitizing the reality goggles, motion controllers and haptic (or tactile) amassed record to create detailed inventories of objects feedback can interact with this material record in virtual across sites, augmented with images and 3D models of or real time and space in order to advance new insights those artifact forms that are important to archaeological into space, time and the settings from which those research, which – as digital models – can then be subject artifacts once existed as the material day-to-day of the to virtual metric and comparative analyses, undertaken ancient peoples who left them behind.
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 70 of 85 9 As well, a full-colour 3D printer For example, the SA allows researchers to explore informational platform includes the potential of printing an inventory module that copies of artifacts – at actual tracks individual objects and size or to scale – for teaching containers through the use of purposes, to allow handling of radio frequency identification otherwise fragile items, to print tags to ensure that we always a reconstruction of objects from know where objects are within the archaeological fragments the large repositories across the of an artifact, or to explore two facilities, and to ensure that the ethical implications of the location is automatically printing Ontario’s archaeological updated as objects are moved heritage. from one room to another, or Scanning artifacts to make a 3D model. between the facilities. Indeed, Other technologies being used the online integration of the at SA include digital X-rays and status of all holdings can change a micro-CT scanner at Western to explore the internal the way a collection is managed, as portions of one structure of plant, animal bone and artifacts – in a non- collection (for example, the ceramic vessels and the invasive manner – to identify species or to examine at a plant remains from a single site) can physically reside in micron-level the composition and manufacture of things. separate facilities across a wide range of shelf locations, The McMaster facility relies on thin-sectioning and the but virtually remains a cohesive whole fully accessible use of an array of high-magnification microscopes to online for digital and virtual study. This digital tracking enable material sciences studies on artifacts and micro- of collections is not in and of itself a radical concept, but artifacts. does provide a degree of confidence and security to basic levels of documentation, management and accessibility More basically, digital technologies assist SA to that has largely eluded archaeology in Ontario before manage and integrate the massive assembly of now. archaeological collections at McMaster and Western.
A micro-CT scan of an ancient ceramic vessel. Printing the past: 3D prints of a projectile point in different sizes. Can you tell which one is real!?
10Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 71 of 85 Scanners reading tagged boxes and artifacts for ease of tracking.
All of these technologies are digitally making the The goal of SA – to consolidate the record digitally record broadly accessible online. But they also enable and make it accessible online – will shape the future archaeologists to work together with First Nations and of archaeology into a sustainable practice, one that descendant communities to think about the archaeology integrates emerging technologies to manage and of this region beyond differing priorities. At SA, it opens know that massive, accumulated record preserved from up the possibility of co-managing the physical and development impact, while ensuring that conservation digital archaeological heritage of Ontario through an efforts to make Ontario’s material past are made advisory committee that comprises archaeologists and available to researchers, First Nations and the public. First Nations that shape the philosophy and operation In the end, it enables us to engage with and shape our of SA. Moreover, a direct and unfettered access to the understanding of the past. digital archaeological record allows First Nations and descendant communities to learn about and shape their own understanding of their heritage – in effect, crowdsourcing their own interpretations of that material record beyond archaeology.
Neal Ferris is the Lawson Chair of Canadian Archaeology at the Department of Anthropology/Museum of Ontario Archaeology at the University of Western Ontario. Dr. Rhonda Bathurst is the Manager of Sustainable Archaeology: Western. And both Michael Carter and Namir Ahmed are anthropology graduate students from the University of Western Ontario.
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 72 of 85 11 The history of archaeological investigations at the Thomson-Walker Site
By Dr. Alicia Hawkins
Huronia – the point of land jutting out into the southern Ridley did not actually excavate at Thomson-Walker, end of Georgian Bay – has caught the imagination of probably because an excellent sample of artifacts had historians and archaeologists for almost two centuries. already been recovered by the Thomsons, but he did The Thomson-Walker site is the location of one of many suggest that the site was the location of the Wendat 17th-century Wendat villages in the region. Collectively, Cord Nation village Teanaustayé and the Jesuit mission of these sites have been subject to scrutiny by a diverse cast St. Joseph II. of characters – from interested amateur archaeologists to academics. The Royal Ontario Museum undertook the first formal research-oriented archaeological work. Under the Archaeologists often try to answer a broad range of direction of archaeologist Burke Penny, a team tested the basic questions about any site: How old is it? Who lived site to determine its boundaries. Researchers estimated there? Was it a village? How large was it? Why was that the site is over 5 hectares (12 acres). Subsequently, it abandoned? Over the years, at least seven different other researchers have revised this downward, but archaeologists or teams of archaeologists have studied the work of Penny demonstrated that this is a village the Thomson-Walker site. of significant size. Penny’s crew also dug several test trenches and were successful in locating a palisade (a In the early 20th century, Andrew Hunter undertook defensive structure). what we would now call a regional survey of Huronia. He visited farmers and asked whether they had found By 1987, the importance of the site was well established. artifacts while clearing or farming the land. Based on Thus, when the concession road was to be widened, a these interviews, he located numerous Wendat sites. His group organized by Jamie Hunter (Huronia Museum) was description of the Thomson-Walker site is short, but it able to undertake salvage excavations. This group made places it squarely within the French period. important contributions to our understanding of the site. They were the first to document post-hole features (they The site is bisected by a concession road and, in the discovered four houses all facing the same direction). 1940s, the property on the east side was purchased Secondly, all artifact-rich soils were water-screened by the Thomson family. The Thomsons had no small through fine mesh, allowing for the recovery of many acquaintance with archaeology: daughter Margaret small glass beads and animal bones. excavated at Fort Ste. Marie during the early 1940s and eventually married Royal Ontario Museum archaeologist Since 1987, excavations at Thomson-Walker have been Douglas Tushingham. intermittent. The Thomsons pursued Three university their interest through field schools excavations of middens (1993, 1995 (refuse heaps) at the and 2006) have edge of the site. They been located at recovered a rich array of the site. Those artifacts and generously directed by donated the majority Martha Latta of this collection to the (University
Royal Ontario Museum. An iron offset awl with a bone handle shows a combination of aboriginal and European of Toronto) (Douglas and Margaret technologies. resulted in the Tushingham donated the discovery of property to the Trust in 1987). more sections of the palisade and another house, aligned in the same direction as those discovered in Andrew Hunter’s survey work was followed by that of 1987. The Laurentian field school in 2006 confirmed Frank Ridley in the 1960s and 1970s. the findings of Latta.
12Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 73 of 85 Researcher Holly Martelle identified individual potters at Two field school students record the location of soil stains. Thomson-Walker based on tiny variations in decoration.
Unfortunately, the story of the excavations at the site There is certainly much more that we can learn from does not end here, but rather with the discovery that the analysis of the rich collections that this important site site had been disturbed by metal detector enthusiasts provides. The exact identification of the Thomson-Walker in 2009. Through the collaborative work of the Ontario site remains open for discussion, but it is clear that it is Provincial Police and the Ontario Heritage Trust, the a large, Wendat Cord Nation village dating to the Jesuit objects that were looted from the site have been turned period. over to the Trust.
Alicia Hawkins is an Associate Professor at Laurentian University’s School of the Environment.
Archaeology at the Trust Facts and figures
The Trust has conducted archaeological research on its • 148 registered archaeological sites owned and properties since 1970. Our practice is to consider conserved by the Trust or protected by conservation archaeological potential on every heritage site that easements we acquire and to ensure that archaeological • over one million artifacts have been excavated from resources are identified and protected. Archaeological Trust properties within 163 collections excavation occurs when impact necessitates excavation. • largest site: Chedoke Falls site, 1.6 hectares, contains an The Trust’s preferred approach is to avoid archaeological early to middle Iroquoian site 1280-1350 BCE (before deposits and protect in situ. The resulting archaeological current era) collections form an interpretive resource that • oldest site: Farmer site, 9500-3000 BCE strengthens our understanding of our sites. • most sites on one property: 35 (Glassco Park in Vaughan)
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 74 of 85 13 Breaking ground
By Lena Rye
On a July morning in 2010, an 11-year-old girl arrived at spear-throwers. Excavating an aboriginal site is important Toronto’s Spadina House. Excited and only slightly scared, because its represents a significant part of Canada’s heritage. she wondered what the next two weeks would bring. Little did she know that attending When I first attended the archaeology summer camp Spadina archaeology camp would transform her. That five years ago, I didn’t little girl is me. And since necessarily have the intention then, I’ve attended the of returning, let alone Spadina Archaeology camp considering archaeology as for four years in a row and a career path. I thought I volunteered for two more. had always wanted to be an author and illustrator. But I’ve Spadina House is a precious come to realize that creating historical building in the heart a story plot is like figuring of Toronto. While the house out how our ancestors once – with its period rooms filled lived. Whether or not I pursue with beautiful furnishings – archaeology as a career, I is spectacular, the gorgeous know that this experience will grounds beg to be explored. During the 2015 Spadina Camp, I developed and led an artifact workshop forever remain a part of me. for the campers. Each day, archaeology camp And in the end, what’s more participants would spend four hours digging, interspersed fun than digging holes in the ground and getting caked in with lessons, fieldtrips, cleaning and bagging artifacts. dirt while looking for buried treasure? This year, campers found numerous artifacts, including a Union Jack pin, a pet identification tag and a piece of blue edgeware ceramic. Learning in such a tactile way has always been engaging.
While volunteering this year, I organized a game where campers would create stories based on groupings of everyday objects. This happened naturally during the dig when campers imagined what the excavation site used to be. I wanted to encourage this type of thinking, as this is what archaeologists work toward: reconstructing the past. We had some good laughs and it helped me think of archaeology in terms of imaginative problem solving.
This past August, I also participated in the Boyd Archaeological Field School at Pickering’s Claremont Conservation Centre. It is an intense two-and-a-half-week- long high school credit course (offered through the Toronto At the Sebastien Site, Boyd Field School. and Region Conservation Authority), where we excavated a First Nations settlement. The days were spent at the dig, with Lena Rye is a Grade 11 student in Toronto. She plans to lectures and activities in the evenings. combine her love of history, creative writing and visual art in her future endeavours. I always anticipated the “archaic skills” workshop, where we would create traditional tools – fish nets, woven baskets and
14Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 75 of 85 Challenges of archaeological collections management
By Dr. Robert I. MacDonald
While buildings are among the most visible elements of universities and other public institutions across the province, heritage landscapes, they are frequently like the tip of which may well comprise enough to cover the other half of the proverbial iceberg, associated with vast underground that soccer pitch. archaeological deposits While this wealth of capable of fleshing out artifacts may seem like cultural history narratives a boon to museums, – of both pre-contact the reality is that aboriginal and post- only a fraction of the contact Euro-Canadian artifacts recovered occupations – in substantial through archaeology detail through their careful will ever find their way investigation. into public exhibits – likely less than one The task of curating these in 100,000 – as the finds is fulfilled by over 450 majority of artifacts are consulting archaeologists not considered to be licensed under the Ontario exhibit-worthy Heritage Act by the Ministry because they are of Tourism, Culture and deemed too pedestrian Sport. The ministry assists (e.g., window glass, iron both public- and private- nails, flint chips, etc.), sector land developers lack integrity in meeting their various Archaeological excavation of the New Fort site (AjGu-32). The foundations seen here are (e.g., small potsherds), statutory obligations to associated with the New Fort, a 3.2-hectare complex of standing structures and are fragile or require steward the province’s underground deposits constructed in 1841 to provide additional facilities for Toronto’s specialized conservation military garrison. It was renamed the Stanley Barracks in 1893. Photo: John Howarth archaeological heritage. treatment (e.g., Annually, this work results carbonized floral in the registration of hundreds of new archaeological sites remains) or are redundant when compared to exemplary that span the 12,000 years of human occupation in Ontario pieces already on display (e.g., spear points and arrowheads). and the recovery of thousands of artifacts in the course With space increasingly at a premium, museums and of archaeological surveys, site assessments and salvage universities have necessarily become selective with respect excavations of threatened sites. to the archaeological collections they are willing or able to accommodate. Since the enactment of the Ontario Heritage Act in 1975 and the development of the archaeological heritage management This problem is not unique to Ontario or even Canada, as the industry since the 1980s, it is estimated that Ontario’s growing problem of collections management has become an archaeologists are the custodians of artifact collections that issue of concern worldwide wherever archaeological heritage would fill approximately 25,000 cardboard banker’s boxes, management has been developed as an important feature of enough to cover – when laid side by side – about half of a maturing societies. professional soccer pitch. This repository does not include the vast archaeological collections previously acquired in the 19th In Ontario, a longer-term solution has been developed by and 20th centuries and already curated by museums, a collaborative initiative between Western University and McMaster University with funding from both the federal and provincial governments.
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 76 of 85 15 Artifacts (clockwise from top left): Hand-wrought and machine cut nails, screws and a spike, window glass from a Euro-Canadian homestead, carbonized corn cobs from a pre-contact village site, pre-contact ceramic potsherds, and pre-contact flint debitage produced during the production of chipped stone tools.
With a collective storage capacity large enough to house Licensed archaeologists across the province manage the the equivalent of approximately 80,000 banker’s boxes collections arising from their archaeological investigation, of artifacts, the Sustainable Archaeology project aims to including artifact cleaning, cataloguing, analysis, work with the archaeological community, descendant conservation, curation and interpretation. This will communities and the public to ensure access to collections continue to be important work along with addressing the and dissemination of knowledge arising from their ongoing ongoing collections management challenges that face all study. In so doing, Sustainable Archaeology seems to offer archaeologists throughout Ontario. an excellent alternative to traditional museums, although certainly not the only alternative. For example, some First Nations are considering the establishment of similar Robert MacDonald is the president of the Ontario facilities that might better serve the interests of their own Archaeological Society. communities with respect to the stewardship of culturally relevant archaeological collections. Images courtesy of Archaeological Services Inc.
16Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 77 of 85 By the numbers
Compiled by the Archaeology Program Unit at the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport
Archaeology is an important part of the planning and development process in Ontario. Each year, thousands of archaeological assessments are completed by licensed archaeologists to ensure that our shared cultural heritage is preserved. These assessments are carried out in advance of construction projects, such as solar or wind farms, subdivisions and new roads. As a result, archaeologists have documented hundreds of archaeological sites. That information helps us fill in the gaps in our knowledge of the history of our province.
Reports on these assessments are filed with the ministry and are accessible to all Ontarians through the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports.
Archaeological sites in the province range in size from a single artifact (such as a spear point or arrowhead) to early 19th-century industrial towns and large aboriginal villages that cover a few hectares. Archaeologists record and track sites through a national system; Ontario maintains the Archaeological Sites Database.
By the years
1953 1993 2011 first heritage legislation passed in Ontario: guidelines introduced for doing new standards and guidelines An Act for the Protection of Archaeological archaeological assessments for development introduced for doing archaeology for and Historic Sites the development industry
1975 2005 Ontario Heritage Act comes into force, Ontario Heritage Act revised to establish a introducing many more heritage-related public register of archaeological reports, making protections and procedures information about the archaeology of our By the numbers province accessible to all Ontarians
4 17 467 types of licences that can be issued average yearly number of marine individuals who are licensed to to archaeologists in the province licences issued to explore the carry out archaeological fieldwork – avocational, applied research, waters of Ontario’s lakes, rivers and in the province professional and marine streams for marine heritage 1,000 2,500 12,000 average yearly number of average yearly number of approximate number of years ago archaeological sites found as a archaeological projects carried out, that the oldest archaeological sites result of archaeological fieldwork including consulting archaeology in Ontario were formed for development and research
For more information on Ontario’s 15,000+ 32,000+ Archaeology Program, visit number of reports filed in number of archaeological the Ontario Public Register of sites listed in the ministry’s www.ontario.ca/archaeology. Archaeological Reports since Archaeological Sites Database it was introduced in April 2005
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 78 of 85 17 Seeing the unseen: Archaeology and geophysics
By Dena Doroszenko
As population will vary from growth results location to in substantial location. Each impact to Ontario’s technique has landscapes, strengths and efficient and cost- constraints that effective methods make it more or to locate, map and less effective in acquire information detecting sub- from archaeological surface features, sites are needed – depending before the sites are on the lost. environmental conditions. Archaeological Interestingly, excavation is geophysics can essentially a detect and map destructive features both science. As each underground Collecting GPR data at the Henson Family Cemetery in Dresden, Ontario. archaeological and underwater. site is excavated, it is systematically destroyed. Consequently, each step of Archaeologists can be greatly assisted in setting excavation the excavation can be painstakingly slow, due to the need priorities if geophysical methods are used first. These to carefully document each find and each level. As with methods have the ability to allow large areas of the every scientific endeavor, technology is beginning to change subsurface to be investigated, precisely mapped and the way archaeologists work. Archaeogeophysics refers interpreted based on their form, distribution, context and to ground-based subsurface mapping using a number of measurement characteristics. Irregularities in the landscape different sensing technologies (see sidebar). Geophysical indicated by geophysics are factual. In other words, a real methods provide additional ways to examine the remains of physical cause must exist in the ground. earlier cultures and give us clues to our province’s past. Ground-truthing by archaeologists includes verifying the Geophysics involves methods of data collection that allow presence of archaeological features detected through the archaeologists to discover and map buried archaeological use of geophysics by placing excavation units in those areas. features in ways not possible using traditional field excavation methods. Using a variety of instruments, physical Due to provincial legislation in Ontario, archaeological and chemical changes in the ground, related to the presence assessments are often required prior to the clearing of an or absence of buried materials, can be measured and area and construction of new buildings. Frequently, the mapped. When these changes can be connected to certain time available for the archaeological effort may be limited. aspects of archaeological sites such as architecture (buried Geophysical methods may be of great value as the site walls), use areas (hearths), or other associated cultural will often be totally destroyed by the new construction. features (artifacts), high definition maps and images of buried Determining the impact of the existing environment on the remains can be produced. ability to use geophysics must be considered and evaluated by geoscientists and archaeologists in order to develop Survey results can be used to guide excavation and to give innovative investigation methods. archaeologists insight into the patterning of non-excavated parts of the sites. The appropriate geophysical techniques that should be employed in an archaeological investigation
18Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 79 of 85 Composite slice map showing high amplitude reflections (in red) from assumed unmarked and marked historical graves at the Henson Family Cemetery. As new equipment and software are introduced, new geophysics and geographic information systems have demands are placed on archaeologists to understand this enhanced the toolkit for archaeologists. Geophysics has technology and to learn how data can be assembled into the potential to assist decision makers with better access to a coherent whole. This permits one to combine data from the archaeological record, in a way that is non-invasive or classes of measurement such as artifact densities, topography, destructive and that may stimulate more opportunities for magnetometry, ground penetrating radar, conductivity, in-situ conservation. global positioning systems and aerial/satellite imagery.
The human past has been the subject of scientific inquiry for Dena Doroszenko is the Archaeologist at the centuries, and has long been approached through studying Ontario Heritage Trust. Text reprinted from Heritage Matters, material remains recovered from traditional archaeological Volume 9, Issue 2, May/June 2011. excavations. In recent decades, the advancing fields of
Geophysical survey methods
Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) is the measurement of the soil’s electrical resistance, and is useful for finding buried wall foundations, ditches, burial area s and a range of other features.
Electromagnetic (EM) Conductivity is the inverse of resistivity. It measures the ability of the soil to conduct electricity. Items that conduct electricity easily show up as high in conductivity, indicating potential buried materials such as walls, foundations, roads, wells, canals, pits, hearths and graves.
Magnetometry is suitable for finding buried hearths, walls, ditches or any magnetized (heated) materials, such as burned soils. A gradiometer is an instrument that measures slight changes in the earth’s magnetic field.
Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is used to send a radar signal through the ground and measure the transit time for sending and return. The results are compiled into a three-dimensional map of what lies beneath the surface, such as hearths, post-holes, ditches, voids or cavities, wall foundations and burials.
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 80 of 85 19 Resources
Compiled by Patryk Weglorz
Online
Archaeological Institute of America Ontario Association of Professional Archaeologists • www.archaeological.org • www.apaontario.ca
Canadian Archaeological Association Parks Canada • https://canadianarchaeology.com • www.pc.gc.ca/eng/progs/arch/index.aspx
Canadian Conservation Institute Royal Ontario Museum • www.cci-icc.gc.ca/services/arch/index-eng.aspx • www.rom.on.ca/en/collections-research/blog/category/ Archaeology Canadian Museum of History • www.historymuseum.ca/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/ Save Ontario Shipwrecks archaeology • http://saveontarioshipwrecks.ca
Council for North Eastern Historical Archaeology Society for American Archaeology (CNEHA) • www.saa.org • http://cneha.org Society for Historical Archaeology Historic England • http://sha.org • https://historicengland.org.uk/research/approaches/ research-methods/Archaeology Sustainable Archaeology Centres – Western • http://sustainablearchaeology.org Huronia Museum • http://huroniamuseum.com The Archaeology Centre at University of Toronto • www.archaeology.utoronto.ca International Committee on Archaeological Heritage Management (ICAHM) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority – • http://ip51.icomos.org/icahm Archaeology • www.trca.on.ca/the-living-city/land/archaeology International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), Charter for the Protection and Trent University Archaeology Research Centre Management of the Archaeological Heritage (1990) • www.trentu.ca/tuarc • www.international.icomos.org/ charters/arch_e.pdf World Archaeological Congress • http://worldarch.org Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport • www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/archaeology
Museum of Ontario Archaeology • http://archaeologymuseum.ca
Ontario Archaeological Society • http://ontarioarchaeology.wildapricot.org
20Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 81 of 85 On the shelf
Peterborough Archaeology, edited by Dirk Verhulst. The The Mantle Site: An Archaeological History of an Peterborough Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society, Ancestral Wendat Community, by Jennifer Birch and Ronald Peterborough, 2015. F. Williamson. AltaMira Press, New York, 2012.
Rethinking Colonial Pasts through Archaeology, edited Before Ontario: The Archaeology of a Province. Edited by Neal Ferris, Rodney Harrison, and Michael V. Wilcox. Oxford by Marit K. Munson and Susan M. Jamieson. McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2015. University Press, Montreal, 2013.
Petun to Wyandot: The Ontario Petun from the Sixteenth Century, by Charles Garrad. Edited by Jean-Luc Pilon and William Fox. University of Ottawa Press, 2014.
Patryk Weglorz is an archaeology student at the University of Toronto Mississauga and has worked summers at the Trust in 2014 and 2015.
Toiletry basin, Canova pattern in red, dating to the mid-nineteenth century. Excavated at Inge-va. Photo: John Howarth
Reassembled glass vessel, excavated at Inge-Va Child’s mug, which belonged to Charles Radenhurst, (a property in Perth, Ontario, owned by the Ontario excavated at Inge-Va from an abandoned privy. Photo: Heritage Trust), shown prior to conservation treament. John Howarth
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 82 of 85 21 Elgin and Winter Garden Enoch Turner Schoolhouse Fulford Place Homewood Museum Inge-Va Theatre Centre BRINGING OUR STORY TO LIFE Ontario Heritage Trust
Macdonell-Williamson Mather-Walls House Niagara Apothecary Sir Harry Oakes Chateau Uncle Tom’s Cabin House Historic Site
Visit these Trust properties and learn about Ontario’s heritage in a unique and compelling way.
• Elgin and Winter Garden Theatre Centre • Macdonell-Williamson House (East Hawkesbury) (Toronto) • Mather-Walls House (Kenora) • Enoch Turner Schoolhouse (Toronto) • Niagara Apothecary (Niagara-on-the-Lake) • Fulford Place (Brockville) • Sir Harry Oakes Chateau (Kirkland Lake) • Homewood Museum (Prescott, near Brockville) • Uncle Tom’s Cabin Historic Site (Dresden) • Inge-Va (Perth)
For more information, visit www.heritagetrust.on.ca/museums
Ontario Heritage Trust Heritage Matters Magazine - October 2... Page 83 of 85 Support Ontario’s heritage! Donate now: www.heritagetrust.on.ca/donations
Staff Report to Council
To: Mayor Schermerhorn and Members of Council
Date: October 27th, 2015
Prepared By: Kristie Clement, Manager of Environmental Compliance
Presented By: Peter Dafoe, General Manager of Infrastructure Services
Re: Infrastructure Services - 18 Water Street East
Staff Recommendation: That Council receive for information purposes, a summary of the current status of the property at 18 Water Street East, Napanee; And further that Council authorizes the demolition of the existing structure at 18 Water Street East, Napanee.
Financial Implications The cost for the demolition of the existing house structure will be minimal as staff plan to complete the project primarily with internal forces and equipment. All non-hazardous building materials will be hauled to the South Fredericksburgh Waste Disposal Site for final disposal. Accessibility Implications After review, it was determined that there are no accessibility implications at this time.
Information Technology Implications After review, it was determined that there are no information technology implications at this time.
Energy Management Implications After review, it was determined that there are no energy management implications at this time. Background Information The noted property was purchased by the Town on June 5, 2015, for the sum of $160,000.
Demolition of 18 Water Street East - The structure is a batt... Page 84 of 85 In its current state, the existing structure has no meaningful purpose to the Town. Overall, the building is in poor condition and would require a major renovation to bring it back to a safe and functional condition. As noted by staff, major issues with the house include: exposed wiring, incorrect use of wiring in areas, no heating system, old wooden windows without storms, mold growth, lack of proper insulation, railings and stairs that do not meet the building code and extensive exterior disrepair.
On October 8th, 2015, Pinchin Environmental completed a Hazardous Building Materials Assessment, Designated Substance Survey on the structure. The objective of the assessment was to identify specified hazardous building materials within the house in preparation for building demolition. A final report was submitted to staff which included recommendations for disposal of hazardous building materials. Staff are currently working through the approval process to ensure that the noted hazardous wastes are disposed of appropriately. It should be noted that the majority of the building materials were non-hazardous and are able to be disposed of at the South Fredericksburg Waste Disposal Site.
Staff has proactively registered the Town’s fleet into the Environmental Activity & Sector Registry through the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. This now allows for Non-Hazardous Waste to be transported as necessary, internally using town fleet. The registration will not only be beneficial for the duration of this project, but will be an asset to several departments within the Town for future day-to-day activities.
Discussion Due to its significant state of disrepair, it is recommended that the Town owned structure at 18 Water Street East be demolished. In effort to minimize cost, staff has examined disposal options and has determined that the majority of the project can be completed internally using Town forces and equipment.
The purchase and proposed demolition of 18 Water Street opens up numerous possibilities with respect to future land use and would be included in future revitalization plans for the Conservation Park and surrounding area.
Demolition of 18 Water Street East - The structure is a batt... Page 85 of 85